Filed: Dec. 17, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7741 ENGRAM M. BELLAMY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALYSSA CAMPBELL WELLS; BRENT UZDANOVICS; DOUG DAVIS, Waynesboro Police Department, Defendants – Appellees, and WAYNESBORO POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (5:07-cv-00035-sgw) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 17, 2008 Before WILKINSO
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7741 ENGRAM M. BELLAMY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ALYSSA CAMPBELL WELLS; BRENT UZDANOVICS; DOUG DAVIS, Waynesboro Police Department, Defendants – Appellees, and WAYNESBORO POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (5:07-cv-00035-sgw) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 17, 2008 Before WILKINSON..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7741
ENGRAM M. BELLAMY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ALYSSA CAMPBELL WELLS; BRENT UZDANOVICS; DOUG DAVIS,
Waynesboro Police Department,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
WAYNESBORO POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg. Samuel G. Wilson,
District Judge. (5:07-cv-00035-sgw)
Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 17, 2008
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Engram M. Bellamy, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Hustis Milnor,
ZUNKA, MILNOR, CARTER & INIGO, LTD., Charlottesville, Virginia,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Engram M. Bellamy seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his claims as to one of the four defendants in
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint; the action is proceeding
as to the remaining defendants. 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 Bellamy 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