Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Carter v. Williams, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed the appeal of a district court order that dismissed three of four defendants in a prisoner civil rights case. The appeals court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the limited categories of appealable interlocutory orders. Therefore, the appeals court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-01-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 95-7281

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed the appeal of a district court order that dismissed three of four defendants in a prisoner civil rights case. The appeals court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the limited categories of appealable interlocutory orders. Therefore, the appeals court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    Carter v. Williams, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes an unpublished court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The court dismissed the appeal of a district court order that dismissed three of four defendants in a prisoner civil rights case. The appeals court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the limited categories of appealable interlocutory orders. Therefore, the appeals court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 95-7281

    ANTHONY HUGH CARTER,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JOHN R. WILLIAMS; LEWIS A. BABB; LIEUTENANT
    CARTER; SERGEANT BOYD,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
    Judge. (CA-95-400-5-H)
    Submitted:

    December 14, 1995

    Decided:

    January 17, 1996

    Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Anthony Hugh Carter, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing three
    of four Defendants. 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. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (1988);
    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.,
    337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final
    order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
    We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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

    You might also like