Harden v. Bodiford

380 F. App'x 317
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 27, 2010
DocketNo. 10-6041
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 380 F. App'x 317 (Harden v. Bodiford) 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
Harden v. Bodiford, 380 F. App'x 317 (4th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William G. Harden seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing certain defendants and denying Harden’s motion to amend. 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., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The orders Harden seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appeal-able interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Harden’s motion for appointment of counsel and 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

William Harden v. Scott Bodiford
442 F. App'x 893 (Fourth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
380 F. App'x 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harden-v-bodiford-ca4-2010.