Bush v. Kavanaugh

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedAugust 12, 2003
Docket03-6611
StatusUnpublished

This text of Bush v. Kavanaugh (Bush v. Kavanaugh) 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
Bush v. Kavanaugh, (4th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6611

LARRY L. BUSH,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JACK KAVANAUGH, Commissioner; RONALD HUTCHINSON, Warden; SEWALL B. SMITH, Warden; BERNARD FORD, Captain; JAKE SUTTON, Sergeant; R. EULISS, Captain,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-02- 3780-AMD)

Submitted: July 16, 2003 Decided: August 12, 2003

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry L. Bush, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Stephanie Judith Lane Weber, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Larry L. Bush seeks to appeal an order denying the motion for

recusal of the district judge. 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 (1949). The order Bush seeks to appeal is neither a final order

nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly,

we deny the motions for preparation of transcript at government

expense 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)
Bush v. Kavanaugh, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bush-v-kavanaugh-ca4-2003.