McClain v. North Carolina Department of Correction

Fourth Circuit

McClain v. North Carolina Department of Correction

33 F. App'x 99

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 25, 2002

DocketNos. 01-7918, 01-7999

StatusPublished

This text of 33 F. App'x 99 (McClain v. North Carolina Department of Correction) 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

McClain v. North Carolina Department of Correction, 33 F. App'x 99 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Bart Fitzgerald McClain appeals the district court’s orders dismissing fewer than all the claims and parties in McClain’s complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) (No. 01-7918), and dismissing McClain’s “Motion to Show Cause For the Removal of Counsel” (No. 01-7999). We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the orders are not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); 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 orders here appealed are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.

We dismiss the appeals as interlocutory. Ve 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

PER CURIAM.

Bart Fitzgerald McClain appeals the district court’s orders dismissing fewer than all the claims and parties in McClain’s complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) (No. 01-7918), and dismissing McClain’s “Motion to Show Cause For the Removal of Counsel” (No. 01-7999). We dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction because the orders are not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); 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 orders here appealed are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.

We dismiss the appeals as interlocutory. Ve 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 F. App'x 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcclain-v-north-carolina-department-of-correction-ca4-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack