Braxton v. Kanawha County Courts

115 F. App'x 131
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 14, 2004·No. No. 04-2141·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Anthony James Braxton seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation to deny relief on his civil action. 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 report and recommendation of the magistrate judge is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is 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

Braxton v. Kanawha County Courts, 115 F. App'x 131 (4th Cir. 2004).

115 F. App'x 131 (Braxton v. Kanawha County Courts) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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