De'Lonta v. Clarke

502 F. App'x 265
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 27, 2012·No. No. 12-7634·Published

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ophelia Azriel De’Lonta seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing all but one Defendant, Sarah Pruitt, in De’Lonta’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. 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., 387 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order De’Lonta seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, as it disposes of fewer than all the parties involved in this lawsuit. 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 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

De'Lonta v. Clarke, 502 F. App'x 265 (4th Cir. 2012).

502 F. App'x 265 (De'Lonta v. Clarke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)
See v. City of Seattle
387 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1967)