Nethken v. Bell

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 6, 2002
Docket02-6376
StatusUnpublished

This text of Nethken v. Bell (Nethken v. Bell) 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
Nethken v. Bell, (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6376

HARRY THOMAS NETHKEN, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

BOB BELL, Monongalia County Commission President; ANSEL KENNEDY, Monongalia County Commissioner; JOHN PYLES, Monongalia County Commissioner, JOE BARTOLO, Monongalia County Sheriff; AL KISNER, Chief Deputy; TODD FORBES, Deputy,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-125)

Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 6, 2002

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harry Thomas Nethken, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Harry Thomas Nethken, Jr., appeals the recommendation of the

magistrate judge dismissing certain parties and claims in this

§ 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 (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)
Nethken v. Bell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nethken-v-bell-ca4-2002.