Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • William Davis, Jr. v. Department of State, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from William Scott Davis, Jr. for lack of jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals can only hear appeals from final orders of district courts or certain interlocutory orders, but the order Davis sought to appeal - a district court's denial of his motions for recusal, relief from judgment, and additional motions - was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Therefore, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2016-06-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 16-1298

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from William Scott Davis, Jr. for lack of jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals can only hear appeals from final orders of district courts or certain interlocutory orders, but the order Davis sought to appeal - a district court's denial of his motions for recusal, relief from judgment, and additional motions - was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Therefore, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    William Davis, Jr. v. Department of State, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from William Scott Davis, Jr. for lack of jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals can only hear appeals from final orders of district courts or certain interlocutory orders, but the order Davis sought to appeal - a district court's denial of his motions for recusal, relief from judgment, and additional motions - was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Therefore, the Court of Appeals 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. 16-1298

    WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, JR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    DEPARTMENT OF STATE; SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
    Defendants Appellees,
    and
    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; WAKE COUNTY NORTH
    MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT; TOWN OF CARY NORTH CAROLINA,

    CAROLINA

    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Newport News.
    Rebecca Beach Smith,
    Chief District Judge. (4:13-cv-00058-RBS-DEM)

    Submitted:

    June 21, 2016

    Decided:

    June 23, 2016

    Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    William Scott Davis, II,


    Kelley,
    III,
    Assistant
    Virginia, for Appellees.

    Appellant Pro Se.


    George Maralan
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Norfolk,

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    William
    courts
    relief

    Scott

    order
    from

    Davis,

    denying

    his

    judgment,

    and

    additional motions.
    over

    final

    Jr.,

    orders,

    seeks

    motions
    requests

    to

    for

    appeal
    recusal,

    for

    the

    district

    motions

    permission

    to

    for
    file

    This court may exercise jurisdiction only


    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, 545-46 (1949).
    neither

    collateral

    final
    order.

    order

    nor

    The order Davis seeks to appeal is


    an

    Accordingly,

    appealable
    we

    deny

    interlocutory
    Davis

    motions

    or
    to

    appoint counsel and to supplement the record, and dismiss the


    appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    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