Daniels v. Bradford

Fifth Circuit

Daniels v. Bradford

103 F. App'x 852

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 4, 2004

DocketNo. 03-20956

StatusPublished

This text of 103 F. App'x 852 (Daniels v. Bradford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Daniels v. Bradford, 103 F. App'x 852 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*

Adam Daniels, Texas inmate # 619572, appeals from the summary judgment granted in favor of some but not all defendants in his civil rights action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This court must examine the basis for its appellate jurisdiction sua sponte if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals from “final decisions of the district courts.” Brown v. Miss. Valley State Univ., 311 F.3d 328, 331 (5th Cir.2002)(internal quotation and citation omitted). The district court’s “Memorandum and Order on Partial Dismissal” is not a final judgment. See id.; see also Fed.R.CivP. 54(b). Accordingly, the instant appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

All of Daniels’s outstanding motions are DENIED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM:

*

Adam Daniels, Texas inmate # 619572, appeals from the summary judgment granted in favor of some but not all defendants in his civil rights action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This court must examine the basis for its appellate jurisdiction sua sponte if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals from “final decisions of the district courts.” Brown v. Miss. Valley State Univ., 311 F.3d 328, 331 (5th Cir.2002)(internal quotation and citation omitted). The district court’s “Memorandum and Order on Partial Dismissal” is not a final judgment. See id.; see also Fed.R.CivP. 54(b). Accordingly, the instant appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

All of Daniels’s outstanding motions are DENIED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 F. App'x 852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniels-v-bradford-ca5-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack