Hargett v. Forsyth County Sheriff's Office

136 F. App'x 587
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 29, 2005·No. 05-6201·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Charles Franklin Hargett, Jr., appeals the magistrate judge’s recommendation that his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action be dismissed with prejudice. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The magistrate judge’s recommendation is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Where a dispositive matter is referred to the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b) (West Supp.2004), parties must have the opportunity to object, and the district court is required to conduct de novo review of the portions of the recommendation to which objections are made. United States v. Bryson, 981 F.2d 720, 723 (4th Cir.1992). 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 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

Hargett v. Forsyth County Sheriff's Office, 136 F. App'x 587 (4th Cir. 2005).

136 F. App'x 587 (Hargett v. Forsyth County Sheriff's Office) — 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)
United States v. William M. Bryson, Jr.
981 F.2d 720 (Fourth Circuit, 1992)