Jardina v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services

696 F. App'x 130
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedAugust 23, 2017
Docket17-6413
StatusUnpublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 696 F. App'x 130 (Jardina v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services) 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
Jardina v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services, 696 F. App'x 130 (4th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

James J. Jardina seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting summary judgment to certain defendants on some claims in his civil complaint, dismissing some claims with prejudice, and dismissing the remaining claims without prejudice. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because the district court identified a deficiency that Jardina may remedy by filing an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Jardina seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral *131 order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, we deny Jardina’s motions for appointment of counsel and for entry of default judgment, dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Jardina to file an amended complaint. 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 AND REMANDED

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
696 F. App'x 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jardina-v-department-of-public-safety-correctional-services-ca4-2017.