Filed: Apr. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6194 MICHAEL SCOTT PERKINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PETER WHITE; GRAY FAULKNER, III; BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Vance County; WESTERN SURETY, CNA Surety, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03004-FL) Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6194 MICHAEL SCOTT PERKINSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PETER WHITE; GRAY FAULKNER, III; BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Vance County; WESTERN SURETY, CNA Surety, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03004-FL) Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6194
MICHAEL SCOTT PERKINSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
PETER WHITE; GRAY FAULKNER, III; BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS,
Vance County; WESTERN SURETY, CNA Surety,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:13-ct-03004-FL)
Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 29, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Scott Perkinson, Appellant Pro Se. Sonny Sade Haynes,
WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Scott Perkinson seeks to appeal the district
court’s order denying his motion for appointment of counsel.
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28
U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v.
Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,
337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The
order Perkinson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Miller v.
Simmons,
814 F.2d 962, 964-67 (4th Cir. 1987). 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 this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2