Ralph Q. Woods v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Correctional Medical System
This text of 993 F.2d 1541 (Ralph Q. Woods v. South Carolina Department of Corrections Correctional Medical System) 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.
Opinion
993 F.2d 1541
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Ralph Q. WOODS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Correctional
Medical System, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 93-6189.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 3, 1993
Decided: May 27, 1993
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Joseph R. McCrorey, Magistrate Judge. (CA-92-2696-2-17-B)
Ralph Q. Woods, Appellant Pro Se.
Angela Louise Henry, McKay, McKay, Henry & Foster, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina; William Henry Davidson, II, Nauful & Ellis, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
D.S.C.
DISMISSED.
Before RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Ralph Q. Woods appeals the magistrate judge's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. 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.s 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); 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. Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 903 (1987).
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
993 F.2d 1541, 1993 WL 177727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralph-q-woods-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections-correctional-ca4-1993.