Filed: Dec. 18, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7560 ANTONIO DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEP. SARA GIRON, Defendant – Appellee, and RICHLAND COUNTY; SHERIFF LEON LOTT; DEP. ADRIAN THOMPSON; DEP. ADAM CORNWELL; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (4:12-cv-03429-RMG) Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 18, 2015 Befor
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7560 ANTONIO DAVIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEP. SARA GIRON, Defendant – Appellee, and RICHLAND COUNTY; SHERIFF LEON LOTT; DEP. ADRIAN THOMPSON; DEP. ADAM CORNWELL; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (4:12-cv-03429-RMG) Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 18, 2015 Before..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7560
ANTONIO DAVIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DEP. SARA GIRON,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
RICHLAND COUNTY; SHERIFF LEON LOTT; DEP. ADRIAN THOMPSON;
DEP. ADAM CORNWELL; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (4:12-cv-03429-RMG)
Submitted: December 15, 2015 Decided: December 18, 2015
Before GREGORY and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Antonio Davis, Appellant Pro Se. David Allan DeMasters, Joel
Steve Hughes, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to Appellee Sara Giron. 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 Davis 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 this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3