Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Milford Washington v. Michael Reed, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Milford Washington sought to appeal a district court order ruling on discovery and other motions in his civil case. The Fourth Circuit determined that the order was not a final judgment and did not fall into any exceptions, so it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal. The court denied Washington's motion to remand and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-09-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-7760

    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    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Milford Washington sought to appeal a district court order ruling on discovery and other motions in his civil case. The Fourth Circuit determined that the order was not a final judgment and did not fall into any exceptions, so it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal. The court denied Washington's motion to remand and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Milford Washington v. Michael Reed, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Milford Washington sought to appeal a district court order ruling on discovery and other motions in his civil case. The Fourth Circuit determined that the order was not a final judgment and did not fall into any exceptions, so it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal. The court denied Washington's motion to remand and dismissed the appeal.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 14-7760

    MILFORD WASHINGTON, a/k/a Tessuma Nuballa,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    MICHAEL R. REED; PATRICK GURNEY; LOUIS CEI; DANIEL MAHON;
    DAVID ROBINSON; MS. TAYLOR; MS. BEST,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
    Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
    District Judge. (2:13-cv-00644-RBS-TEM)

    Submitted:

    September 9, 2015

    Decided:

    September 11, 2015

    Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Milford Washington, Appellant Pro Se.


    Kate Elizabeth Dwyre,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
    for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Milford

    Washington

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts

    order ruling on several discovery and miscellaneous motions, and


    has

    filed

    motion

    to

    remand.

    This

    court

    may

    exercise

    jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 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, 54546 (1949).
    seeks

    to

    appeal

    is

    neither

    final

    interlocutory or collateral order.


    motion

    to

    jurisdiction.

    remand

    and

    dismiss

    The order Washington

    order

    nor

    an

    appealable

    Accordingly, we deny the


    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

    You might also like