Edmondson v. Potter
This text of Edmondson v. Potter (Edmondson v. Potter) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1339
DELOIS EDMONDSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JACK POTTER, Postmaster General,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-2887-S)
Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 23, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Delois Edmondson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Delois Edmondson appeals the district court’s order dismissing
her civil rights complaint without prejudice because she failed to
perfect service of process. Because Edmondson may refile this
action and perfect service of process, her appeal is interlocutory
and not subject to appellate review under Domino Sugar Corp. v.
Sugar Workers Local 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Edmondson v. Potter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edmondson-v-potter-ca4-2002.