Scribd
Upload
15 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from an interlocutory district court order that dismissed some defendants and claims in a Section 1983 action. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court order was not a final order resolving all claims, nor was it an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As the district court case was still ongoing, the appellate court characterized the appeal as premature and interlocutory in nature, and therefore subject to dismissal.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
15 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal from an interlocutory district court order that dismissed some defendants and claims in a Section 1983 action. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court order was not a final order resolving all claims, nor was it an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As the district court case was still ongoing, the appellate court characterized the appeal as premature and interlocutory in nature, and therefore subject to dismissal.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

64 F.

3d 659

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation


of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
David M. SIMMS, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Warden OSBORNE; Ms. Cody, Counselor; Doctor Raynaud,
Psychiatrist; Captain Ferguson; Lieutenant Doss; Security
Staff at Buckingham Correctional Center; Ms. Cohun,
Grievance Coordinator; R.D. Barlow, Treatment Program
Supervisor; Treatment Team; Ms. Debord, Social Worker; M.
Rostafinski, Dr.; Marsha Altizer; R.G. Picarella,
Psychologist, Defendants--Appellees.
No. 95-6379.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


Aug. 16, 1995.

David M. Simms, appellant pro se.


Mary Elizabeth Shea, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia,
Richmond, VA; Richard Edward Ladd, Jr., Penn, Stuart, Eskridge &
Jones, Abingdon, VA, for appellees.
Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and PHILLIPS,
Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's interlocutory order that dismissed some
defendants and some claims in his Sec. 1983 action. We dismiss the appeal for
lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable.* This court may
exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and

certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988);


Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541
(1949). Since the court has not entered a final order disposing of all of
Appellant's claims, the order here appealed is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
2

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument


because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

To the extent that Simms sought preliminary injunctive relief, we find no abuse
of discretion in the district court's denial thereof. Wetzel v. Edwards, 635 F.2d
283 (4th Cir.1980)

You might also like