Continental Casualty Co. v. Curran

612 F. App'x 687
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 19, 2015·No. No. 15-1089·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John F. Curran, III 'seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying a motion for continuance. 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, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order that Curran seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an ap-pealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Stevenson v. City of Seat Pleasant, 743 F.3d 411, 415-16 (4th Cir.2014). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny the parties’ pending motions as moot. 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.

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

Continental Casualty Co. v. Curran, 612 F. App'x 687 (4th Cir. 2015).

612 F. App'x 687 (Continental Casualty Co. v. Curran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Beaumont
548 B.R. 437 (D. South Carolina, 2016)