Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cornelius Tucker, Jr. v. James C. Fox, Chief Judge Malcolm J. Howard, Judge J.B. French, Warden Bill Clinton, President Al Gore, Vice President, 95-6434 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-6434 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 28, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 60 F.3d 825 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James C. FOX, Chief Judge; Malcolm J. Howard, Judge; J.B. French, Warden; Bill Clinton, President; Al Gore, Vice President, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-6434. United States Court
More

60 F.3d 825
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
James C. FOX, Chief Judge; Malcolm J. Howard, Judge; J.B.
French, Warden; Bill Clinton, President; Al
Gore, Vice President, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-6434.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 18, 1995.
Decided: June 28, 1995.

Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

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

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing all but one of the Defendants. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. 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). The order here appealed is neither 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