Filed: Oct. 19, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1909 BETTYANN L. TALLEY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NANCY D. JONAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-00-612-9-8) Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Na
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1909 BETTYANN L. TALLEY, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus NANCY D. JONAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-00-612-9-8) Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000 Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nan..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-1909
BETTYANN L. TALLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
NANCY D. JONAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (CA-00-612-9-8)
Submitted: October 12, 2000 Decided: October 19, 2000
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nancy D. Jonas, Appellant Pro Se. Bettyann L. Talley, Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Nancy D. Jonas appeals the district court’s order remanding
this case to state court. We have reviewed the record and the dis-
trict court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommen-
dation and find that because the district court remanded this case
for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, its order is unreviewable
under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (1994). See Thermtron Prods. v. Hermans-
dorfer,
423 U.S. 336, 343-46 (1976) (holding limited on other
grounds by Quackenbush v. Allstate Ins. Co.,
517 U.S. 706, 711-15
(1996)); Borneman v. United States,
213 F.3d 819, 824-26 (4th Cir.
2000). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We deny Jonas’ motion
to recall the remittitur and set aside a state court order. 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.
DISMISSED
2