Filed: May 02, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2230 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant - Appellee. No. 15-2231 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. ALL PAST TO PRESENT MAYORS, across this nation; ALL MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this nation; ALL SURVIVORS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this nation; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. No. 15-2233 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DYL
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2230 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant - Appellee. No. 15-2231 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. ALL PAST TO PRESENT MAYORS, across this nation; ALL MOTHERS AND FATHERS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this nation; ALL SURVIVORS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this nation; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants - Appellees. No. 15-2233 TYRONE HURT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. DYLA..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-2230
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2231
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
ALL PAST TO PRESENT MAYORS, across this nation; ALL MOTHERS
AND FATHERS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this nation;
ALL SURVIVORS OF THE PAST TO THE PRESENT, across this
nation; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2233
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DYLANN ROOF,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2234
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DYLANN ROOF; ERIC HOLT; HOLT AND WHITE, Council & Concerned
Citizen; G. O. P. REPUBLICANS; UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES; THE COUNTRY OF GERMANY; THE AMERICAN
COLLEGE DICTIONARY,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2235
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (1946), Hague, Germany;
INTERNATIONAL PEACE COURT (1946), Hague, Germany; KKK,
across this nation,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2236
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
2
v.
THE SOUTH CAROLINA HATE, within this nation; INCLUDING THE
CHIEF OF POLICE, and all law enforcement officials,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2237
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (1946); INTERNATIONAL PEACE
COURT, Hague, Germany (1946); NARCOTIC AGENTS (1972),
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2238
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
CHIEF OF POLICE, and all law enforcement officers,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2241
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
3
v.
7TH DISTRICT, D. C. METROPOLITAN; POLICE DEPARTMENTS; D. C.
COUNCIL,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2242
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - 1946 - (HAGUE, GERMANY);
THE INTERNATIONAL PEACE COURT - 1946 - (HAGUE, GERMANY),
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2243
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2244
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
4
v.
THE STATE OF VIRGINIA; NARCOTIC AGENTS (1972),
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2246
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
THE CENTER OF THE WORLD; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 15-2249
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2250
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
5
THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 15-2251
TYRONE HURT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
U. S. CONSTITUTION; DR. REV. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.;
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, (1946 Hague, Germany);
INTERNATIONAL PEACE COURT, (1946 Hague, Germany); AMERICAN
PEOPLE, in American cities; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (5:15-cv-00310-D; 5:15-cv-00322-D; 5:15-
cv-00335-D; 5:15-cv-00336-D; 5:15-cv-00337-D; 5:15-cv-00341-D;
5:15-cv-00342-D; 5:15-cv-00356-D; 5:15-cv-00409-D; 5:15-cv-
00412-D; 5:15-cv-00413-D; 5:15-cv-00416-D; 5:15-cv-00440-D;
5:15-cv-00469-D; 5:15-cv-00470-D; 5:15-cv-00487-D)
Submitted: March 18, 2016 Decided: May 2, 2016
Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tyrone Hurt, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
6
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Hurt appeals the district court’s order dismissing
his civil actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and
directing Hurt to show cause why a prefiling injunction should
not issue. We dismiss the appeal.
With respect to the dismissal of these actions as
frivolous, we have reviewed the records and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for
the reasons stated by the district court. Hurt v. City of St.
Louis, No. 5:15-cv-00310-D; Hurt v. All Past to Present Mayors,
No. 5:15-cv-00322-D; Hurt v. Roof, Nos. 5:15-cv-00335-D, 5:15-
cv-00336-D; Hurt v. Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00337-D;
Hurt v. The South Carolina Hate, No. 5:15-cv-00341-D; Hurt v.
Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00342-D; Hurt v. Chief of
Police, No. 5:15-cv-00356-D; Hurt v. 7th District, No. 5:15-cv-
00409-D; Hurt v. Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00412-D; Hurt
v. United States, No. 5:15-cv-00413-D; Hurt v. Virginia, Nos.
5:15-cv-00416-D; Hurt v. The Center of the World, No. 5:15-cv-
00440-D; Hurt v. United States, No. 5:15-cv-00469-D; Hurt v.
ACLU, No. 5:15-cv-00470-D; Hurt v. U.S. Constitution, No. 5:15-
cv-00487-D (E.D.N.C. Sept. 23, 2015).
The district court also directed Hurt to show cause why a
prefiling injunction should not issue. Rather than respond to
the court’s order, Hurt filed his notice of appeal. This court
7
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, 545-46 (1949). The
show cause order Hurt seeks to appeal is neither a final order
nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction.
We deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the motion
to amend or correct. 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
8
