Filed: Oct. 17, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1701 ALBERT WILLIAM LACY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GEORGE CASTELLE, Kanawha Co. Chief Public Defender; BARBARA A. BROWN, Deputy Public Defender; JUSTIN COLLIN, Lawyer Public Defender; UNKNOWN PUBLIC DEFENDER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (2:13-cv-18215) Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided:
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1701 ALBERT WILLIAM LACY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GEORGE CASTELLE, Kanawha Co. Chief Public Defender; BARBARA A. BROWN, Deputy Public Defender; JUSTIN COLLIN, Lawyer Public Defender; UNKNOWN PUBLIC DEFENDER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (2:13-cv-18215) Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: O..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1701
ALBERT WILLIAM LACY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GEORGE CASTELLE, Kanawha Co. Chief Public Defender; BARBARA
A. BROWN, Deputy Public Defender; JUSTIN COLLIN, Lawyer Public
Defender; UNKNOWN PUBLIC DEFENDER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston,
District Judge. (2:13-cv-18215)
Submitted: October 13, 2016 Decided: October 17, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert William Lacy, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Albert William Lacy seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985 (2012) complaint.
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, 545–47 (1949). Because
the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied
by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order
Lacy seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable
interlocutory or collateral order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal
Aid Soc’y, Inc.,
807 F.3d 619, 623–24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar
Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,
10 F.3d 1064, 1066–67 (4th
Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss this 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