Cassell v. Williams

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 16, 2009
Docket09-6986
StatusUnpublished

This text of Cassell v. Williams (Cassell v. Williams) 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
Cassell v. Williams, (4th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6986

CHARLES M. CASSELL, III,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

P.A. WILLIAMS; OWENS, Dr.; CONNOR, Officer; HINSIN, Officer; WADE, Officer; MILLS, Officer; MONROE, Officer; GRAGRINIS, Officer; WASHINGTON, Sgt.; SERGEANT BURGESS; OFFICER BLOW; OFFICER HARDEE; NURSE HENRY; ALL OFFICERS & SGTS ON GREY UNIT; CAPTAIN MADDOX,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:08-ct-03156-FL)

Submitted: September 10, 2009 Decided: September 16, 2009

Before KING, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles M. Cassell, III, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Charles M. Cassell, III, seeks to appeal the district

court’s order providing him twenty days to file an amended

complaint in compliance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. This court may

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291

(2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial

Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The orders Cassell

seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable

interlocutory or collateral orders. 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 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)
Cassell v. Williams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cassell-v-williams-ca4-2009.