Barnett v. Wilson

53 F. App'x 272
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 20, 2002
DocketNo. 02-7205
StatusPublished

This text of 53 F. App'x 272 (Barnett v. Wilson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barnett v. Wilson, 53 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Fitzgerald Barnett seeks to appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to hold his case in abeyance. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Barnett seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 F. App'x 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-v-wilson-ca4-2002.