Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kenneth Phillips v. Sewall Smith Bishop L. Robinson John Doe, 95-6216 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6216 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jun. 22, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 59 F.3d 167 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Kenneth PHILLIPS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sewall SMITH; Bishop L. Robinson; John Doe, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-6216. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: May 18, 1995. Decided: June 22, 1995. Kenneth Phill
More

59 F.3d 167
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Kenneth PHILLIPS, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
Sewall SMITH; Bishop L. Robinson; John Doe, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6216.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 22, 1995.

Kenneth Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Richard M. Kastendieck, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant has filed a notice of appeal in his pending 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the record does not contain an appealable order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). Appellant has not sought to appeal a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

2

We 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.

3

DISMISSED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer