USCA1 Opinion

          March 27, 1995
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                           UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                  __________________





        No. 94-1779

                                 ARTHUR J. TOEGEMANN,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                         UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.


                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND


                    [Hon. Ronald R. Lagueux, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________

                                 ____________________

            Arthur J. Toegemann on brief pro se.
            ___________________
            Jeffrey B. Pine, Attorney General, and Thomas  A. Palombo, Special
            _______________                        __________________
        Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellees.


                                _____________________

                                _____________________






















                      Per  Curiam.    Pro  se plaintiff  Arthur Toegemann
                      ___________     ___  __

            appeals a district  court order that requires him  to forward

            monthly payments  to defense  counsel until Toegemann  pays a

            total of $1700.00 to the state of Rhode Island.  The $1700.00

            represents the  total amount  of sanctions that  the district

            court  imposed on  Toegemann  for filing  and litigating  the

            instant action - the second of its kind - against the present

            defendants.  We have thoroughly  reviewed the record and  the

            parties' briefs on appeal.  Toegemann has continuously failed

            to pay a sanction  which we affirmed in 1991.   See Toegemann
                                                            ___ _________

            v. University of Rhode Island, et al., No. 90-1878, (1st Cir.
               __________________________________

            April 3, 1991)(upholding $1000  sanction).  He further offers

            no reasons why  the district court  abused its discretion  in

            imposing an additional $700 in sanctions since we issued that

            decision.   The record indicates that  this additional sum is

            wholly  justified  by  Toegemann's persistent  recalcitrance.

            Accordingly,  the district  court's order  is affirmed.   See
                                                          _________   ___

            Local Rule 27.1.