Filed: Aug. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7308 LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. A. LACY; PERRY RICHMOND; AARON YOUNG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-03633) Submitted: August 22, 2019 Decided: August 26, 2019 Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-7308 LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. A. LACY; PERRY RICHMOND; AARON YOUNG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-03633) Submitted: August 22, 2019 Decided: August 26, 2019 Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublish..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-7308
LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
T. A. LACY; PERRY RICHMOND; AARON YOUNG,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia,
at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-03633)
Submitted: August 22, 2019 Decided: August 26, 2019
Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry Arnold Young, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry Arnold Young seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting in part the
magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing Young’s civil complaint as to some,
but not all, Defendants. 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, 545-
46 (1949). The order Young seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis 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
2