Moody v. Baker

Fifth Circuit

Moody v. Baker

86 F. App'x 721

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 4, 2004

Docket03-41334

StatusUnpublished

This text of 86 F. App'x 721 (Moody v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moody v. Baker, 86 F. App'x 721 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM. *

Donald Moody, Texas state prisoner # 677242, filed a pro se, informa pauperis (IFP) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint in the Eastern District of Texas. Moody appeals the district court’s order transferring the case to the Northern District of Texas and denying his motion for leave to amend his complaint.

This court examines the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. *722 Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). A transfer order is not a final order that may be appealed. See Stelly v. Employers National Ins. Co., 431 F.2d 1251, 1253 (5th Cir.1970). Additionally, the denial of Moody’s motion for leave to amend also is not a final, appealable order. See Smith v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 569 F.2d 325, 326 (5th Cir.1978); McClune v. Shamah, 593 F.2d 482, 486 (3rd Cir.1979). This appeal is therefore DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Moody has also filed a document entitled “motion supplement re-submitted,” which we construe as a motion for leave to file supplemental brief. This pleading is incomprehensible, and Moody offers no clear explanation of why it was filed or its intended purpose. Moody’s motion is therefore DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM. *

Donald Moody, Texas state prisoner # 677242, filed a pro se, informa pauperis (IFP) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint in the Eastern District of Texas. Moody appeals the district court’s order transferring the case to the Northern District of Texas and denying his motion for leave to amend his complaint.

This court examines the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. *722 Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). A transfer order is not a final order that may be appealed. See Stelly v. Employers National Ins. Co., 431 F.2d 1251, 1253 (5th Cir.1970). Additionally, the denial of Moody’s motion for leave to amend also is not a final, appealable order. See Smith v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 569 F.2d 325, 326 (5th Cir.1978); McClune v. Shamah, 593 F.2d 482, 486 (3rd Cir.1979). This appeal is therefore DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Moody has also filed a document entitled “motion supplement re-submitted,” which we construe as a motion for leave to file supplemental brief. This pleading is incomprehensible, and Moody offers no clear explanation of why it was filed or its intended purpose. Moody’s motion is therefore DENIED.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 F. App'x 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moody-v-baker-ca5-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack