Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • Loushonda Myers v. AT&T Corporation, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Încărcat de

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 vizualizări3 pagini
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from a district court order that dismissed a civil complaint without prejudice and without service of process. The Court of Appeals found that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court's order was not a final order and did not fall under any exception that would allow an interlocutory appeal. As such, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.

    Descriere originală:

    Filed: 2014-04-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-2214

    Drepturi de autor

    © Public Domain

    Formate disponibile

    PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from a district court order that dismissed a civil complaint without prejudice and without service of process. The Court of Appeals found that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court's order was not a final order and did not fall under any exception that would allow an interlocutory appeal. As such, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Public Domain
    Descărcați ca PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    7 vizualizări3 pagini

    Loushonda Myers v. AT&T Corporation, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Încărcat de

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from a district court order that dismissed a civil complaint without prejudice and without service of process. The Court of Appeals found that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court's order was not a final order and did not fall under any exception that would allow an interlocutory appeal. As such, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Public Domain
    Descărcați ca PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-2214

    LOUSHONDA MYERS; CM, a minor child; AM, a minor child; MM;


    TYRE MYERS; DAMEON MYERS; MARVIN MYERS, JR.; CHARLENA
    FRANKLIN; ERNEST MATTISON; SANDRA MATTISON,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    v.
    AT&T CORPORATION; UNKNOWN AGENTS OF AT&T CORPORATION; US
    MARSHALS SERVICE; UNKNOWN AGENTS OF US MARSHAL SERVICE;
    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; UNKNOWN AGENTS OF FEDERAL
    BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; PAUL GARDNER; JEFFREY M. LONG;
    PATRICK J. MALEY; ROBERT WAIZENHOFFER; JEFFREY J. BRUNING;
    WILLIE HINDS; GEORGETOWN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT; UNKNOWN
    OFFICERS, AGENTS OF GEORGETOWN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT; 15TH
    CIRCUIT DRUG ENFORCEMENT UNIT, formerly Georgetown County
    Organized Crime Bureau; GREG HEMBREE; SCOTT HIXON; STEPHEN
    BROWN; MAGDELINE SALMENO; SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT
    DIVISION, SLED; UNKNOWN LAW ENFORCEMENT SOURCES IN SOUTH
    CAROLINA; KERI POPE; KEENAN KEITH; RANDY GAMBLE; JIMMY
    CAGLE; JODY WARD; MICAH LEDDY; GEORGETOWN COUNTY SHERIFFS
    DEPARTMENT; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, AGENTS OF GEORGETOWN COUNTY
    SHERIFFS OFFICE; BRYAN KONIG; JACK SCOVILLE; 15TH CIRCUIT
    SOLICITORS OFFICE, Georgetown and Horry Counties; DAN FURR;
    KELVIN WAITES; SCOTT SCOGGIN; LANE CRIBB; UNKNOWN INFORMANTS
    AND-OR WITNESSES OF THE GCPD; NELSON BROWN; GLEN KUFEN;
    JERMAINE ARMSTRONG; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; JOHN HILLIARD,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston.
    Richard Mark Gergel, District
    Judge. (2:13-cv-01432-RMG)

    Submitted:

    March 7, 2014

    Decided:

    April 1, 2014

    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Loushonda Myers; CM; AM; MM; Tyre Myers; Dameon Myers; Marvin
    Myers, Jr.; Charlena Franklin; Ernest Mattison; Sandra Mattison,
    Appellants Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    The

    Appellants

    seek

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts

    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and


    dismissing their civil complaint without prejudice and without
    service of process.

    This court may exercise jurisdiction only

    over

    28

    final

    orders,

    U.S.C.

    1291

    (2012),

    and

    certain

    interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (2012);


    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
    337

    U.S.

    541,

    545-46

    (1949).

    The

    order

    Appellants

    seek

    to

    appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory


    or collateral order.

    See Penn-America Ins. Co. v. Mapp, 521

    F.3d 290, 294-96 (4th Cir. 2008); Go Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft


    Corp., 508 F.3d 170, 176 (4th Cir. 2007); Domino Sugar Corp. v.
    Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir.
    1993).

    Accordingly,

    jurisdiction.

    we

    dismiss

    the

    appeal

    for

    lack

    of

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts

    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials


    before

    this

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional

    process.

    DISMISSED

    S-ar putea să vă placă și