Pizzuto v. Randolph

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 10, 2010·No. 10-1209·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1209

CAROL L. PIZZUTO,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

REBECCA RANDOLPH; RICHARD LUCAS; MAIN STREET FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION; WILLIAM CRISWELL; KEVIN GESSLER; SHAWN R. TURAK; THE HONORABLE SCOTT R. SMITH; CITY OF WHEELING; JOHN DOE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:10-cv-00017-FPS)

Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 10, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carol L. Pizzuto, Appellant Pro Se. Keith C. Gamble, PULLIN, FOWLER, FLANAGAN, BROWN & POE, PLLC, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Carol L. Pizzuto seeks to appeal the district court’s

February 9, 2010 “First Order and Notice Regarding Discovery and

Scheduling”. 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 (1949). The order Pizzuto seeks to appeal is neither a final

order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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

Pizzuto v. Randolph, (4th Cir. 2010).

Pizzuto v. Randolph (Pizzuto v. Randolph) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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