Filed: Jul. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1635 BARBARA MICHELLE BUSH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHERN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION; WILLIAM KAINU, Defendants - Appellees, and VIVIAN CARDULLO, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; DAVID HILLMAN, Chief Executive Officer and President, Southern Management Corporation, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-1635 BARBARA MICHELLE BUSH, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SOUTHERN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION; WILLIAM KAINU, Defendants - Appellees, and VIVIAN CARDULLO, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; DAVID HILLMAN, Chief Executive Officer and President, Southern Management Corporation, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1635
BARBARA MICHELLE BUSH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SOUTHERN MANAGEMENT CORPORATION; WILLIAM
KAINU,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
VIVIAN CARDULLO, U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; DAVID HILLMAN,
Chief Executive Officer and President,
Southern Management Corporation,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA-
01-2216-CCB)
Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: July 31, 2002
Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Barbara Michelle Bush, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Wayne Bertram,
Jeffrey Roger Schmieler, SAUNDERS & SCHMIELER, Silver Spring,
Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Barbara Michelle Bush appeals the district court’s order
denying without prejudice her motion to voluntarily dismiss the
action. 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. § 1291 (1994), and certain
interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S.
541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor
an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. Bush’s motions for
appointment of counsel, for emergency relief, and for general
relief are denied. 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