Mitchell Alfonso Key v. Jim McCaulley Jail Administrator, Richland County Detention Center

25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20905, 1994 WL 197107
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 18, 1994
Docket94-6052
StatusPublished

This text of 25 F.3d 1039 (Mitchell Alfonso Key v. Jim McCaulley Jail Administrator, Richland County Detention Center) 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
Mitchell Alfonso Key v. Jim McCaulley Jail Administrator, Richland County Detention Center, 25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20905, 1994 WL 197107 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

25 F.3d 1039
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Mitchell Alfonso KEY, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Jim MCCAULLEY, Jail Administrator, Richland County Detention
Center, Defendant Appellee.

No. 94-6052.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 21, 1994.
Decided: May 18, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-93-1009-3-17AJ)

Mitchell Alfonso Key, Appellant Pro Se.

William Henry Davidson, II, Ellis, Lawhorne, Davidson, Sims, Morrison & Sojourner, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

D.S.C.

DISMISSED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motions for leave to amend his complaint and for summary judgment. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F.3d 1039, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 20905, 1994 WL 197107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-alfonso-key-v-jim-mccaulley-jail-administ-ca4-1994.