Olszowy v. Berkeley County Summary Courts

403 F. App'x 852
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 2, 2010
DocketNo. 10-7231
StatusPublished

This text of 403 F. App'x 852 (Olszowy v. Berkeley County Summary Courts) 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
Olszowy v. Berkeley County Summary Courts, 403 F. App'x 852 (4th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Christopher and Anna Olszowy seek to appeal the district court order denying their motion for appointment of counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. [853]*8531221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order the Olszowys’ seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Further, we deny their motion for a change of venue and to suspend briefing. 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)
403 F. App'x 852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olszowy-v-berkeley-county-summary-courts-ca4-2010.