Richardson v. Faulk
This text of 651 F. App'x 153 (Richardson v. Faulk) 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
[154]*154Dismissed by unpublished per curiam • opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Lenir Richardson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her motion to remand and denying her motion for recusal. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Richardson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appeal-able interlocutory or collateral order. Richardson may seek review of these decisions on appeal from the court’s final judgment. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 this 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
651 F. App'x 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richardson-v-faulk-ca4-2016.