Legal Opinion
Meiselman v. Byrom
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided August 9, 2005No. Docket No. 02-7677PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff-Appellant Annette Meiselman (“Meiselman”) appeals pro se from a judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees Eric Byrom and Nassau County, in Meiselman’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against them.1 Meiselman argues on appeal that *165the trial was “fraudulent” in any number of ways. She alleges, inter alia, that the district judge improperly suppressed evidence; that a defense witness was not who she claimed to be; that certain evidence was altered and a witness…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- John C. Norton v. Sam's Club, Wal-Mart Corp., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Burgos v. HopkinsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Rona Hertzner v. William J. Henderson, as Postmaster General for the United States Postal ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- Meiselman v. ByromDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2002
3Cited by1 opinion
- Shabazz v. HowardDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2023