Hyman v. City of Gastonia

Fourth Circuit

Hyman v. City of Gastonia

137 F. App'x 536

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 23, 2005

Docket04-2183

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 137 F. App'x 536 (Hyman v. City of Gastonia) 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

Hyman v. City of Gastonia, 137 F. App'x 536 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Larry S. Hyman, Liquidating Trustee for Governmental Risk Insurance Trust, appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice the complaint against the City of Gastonia, North Carolina, alleging breach of contract * and denying Hyman’s motion filed under Fed. R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, the joint appendix, and the materials submitted pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 28(j), and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hyman v. City of Gastonia, No. CA-04-25-3 (W.D.N.C. July 1, 2004; Aug. 17, 2004). We deny Hyman’s motion to supplement the record and amended motion to supplement the record 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.

AFFIRMED

*

Generally, dismissals without prejudice are not appealable. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir.1993). However, a dismissal without prejudice could be final if no amendment to the complaint could cure the- defects in the plaintiff's case. Id. at 1066-67. We find that the district court’s order is a final, appealable order because the defects in the complaint— failure to properly serve the City — must be cured by something more than an amendment to the complaint. Id.

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

PER CURIAM.

Larry S. Hyman, Liquidating Trustee for Governmental Risk Insurance Trust, appeals the district court’s orders dismissing without prejudice the complaint against the City of Gastonia, North Carolina, alleging breach of contract * and denying Hyman’s motion filed under Fed. R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, the joint appendix, and the materials submitted pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 28(j), and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hyman v. City of Gastonia, No. CA-04-25-3 (W.D.N.C. July 1, 2004; Aug. 17, 2004). We deny Hyman’s motion to supplement the record and amended motion to supplement the record 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.

AFFIRMED

*

Generally, dismissals without prejudice are not appealable. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066 (4th Cir.1993). However, a dismissal without prejudice could be final if no amendment to the complaint could cure the- defects in the plaintiff's case. Id. at 1066-67. We find that the district court’s order is a final, appealable order because the defects in the complaint— failure to properly serve the City — must be cured by something more than an amendment to the complaint. Id.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 F. App'x 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hyman-v-city-of-gastonia-ca4-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack