Murphy v. Peumansend Creek Regional Jail

48 F. App'x 881
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 21, 2002
DocketNo. 02-7279
StatusPublished

This text of 48 F. App'x 881 (Murphy v. Peumansend Creek Regional Jail) 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
Murphy v. Peumansend Creek Regional Jail, 48 F. App'x 881 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Eric Murphy appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his § 1983 action. 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. § 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 order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 892, 10 F.3d 1064,1066-67 (4th Cir.1993).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 F. App'x 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-peumansend-creek-regional-jail-ca4-2002.