Roberts v. North Branch Facility

Fourth Circuit

Roberts v. North Branch Facility

599 F. App'x 60

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 31, 2015

DocketNo. 14-7442

StatusPublished

This text of 599 F. App'x 60 (Roberts v. North Branch Facility) 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

Roberts v. North Branch Facility, 599 F. App'x 60 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brandon Roberts seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for discovery in this action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain inter[61]*61locutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 387 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Roberts 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 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

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brandon Roberts seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for discovery in this action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain inter[61]*61locutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 387 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Roberts 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

599 F. App'x 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-v-north-branch-facility-ca4-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack