Cornelius Tucker, Jr. v. Mr. Lucas Ms. Holland Joel Herron Lynn C. Phillips F.B. Freeman

25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20842, 1994 WL 200809
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 19, 1994
Docket94-6102
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1041 (Cornelius Tucker, Jr. v. Mr. Lucas Ms. Holland Joel Herron Lynn C. Phillips F.B. Freeman) 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
Cornelius Tucker, Jr. v. Mr. Lucas Ms. Holland Joel Herron Lynn C. Phillips F.B. Freeman, 25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20842, 1994 WL 200809 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1041
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Cornelius TUCKER, Jr., Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Mr. LUCAS; Ms. Holland; Joel Herron; Lynn C. Phillips;
F.B. Freeman, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-6102.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 21, 1994.
Decided May 19, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-93-511-H)

Cornelius Tucker, Jr., appellant pro se.

E.D.N.C.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order granting him ninety days to exhaust administrative remedies. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory.* 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

*

We also deny Tucker's motion to remand all of his pending appeals

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)
25 F.3d 1041, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20842, 1994 WL 200809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cornelius-tucker-jr-v-mr-lucas-ms-holland-joel-her-ca4-1994.