Filed: Dec. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1743 BRYAN O’NEAL BENSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PLAZA ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED; J. COOPER, Crabtree Police Officer; MONK, Security Officer; JOHN DOE, Security Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-cv-00087-FL) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007 Before N
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1743 BRYAN O’NEAL BENSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PLAZA ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED; J. COOPER, Crabtree Police Officer; MONK, Security Officer; JOHN DOE, Security Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-cv-00087-FL) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007 Before NI..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1743
BRYAN O’NEAL BENSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
PLAZA ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED; J. COOPER,
Crabtree Police Officer; MONK, Security
Officer; JOHN DOE, Security Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (5:07-cv-00087-FL)
Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bryan O’Neal Benson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bryan O’Neal Benson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
granting Benson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dismissing his
claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, and
allowing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) claim to proceed. This court
may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291
(2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.
Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Benson seeks to appeal
is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order. Accordingly, we 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
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 2 -