Sawyer v. Alexander
This text of Sawyer v. Alexander (Sawyer v. Alexander) 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
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6151
RONALD JERRY SAWYER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
S. ALEXANDER; T. GOODRICH; D. LIPSCONE; R. WALKER, Sergeant,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 96-6432
Plaintiff - Appellant, versus
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CA-95-1105-CV-2, CA-95-1103-CV-2) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: July 30, 1996
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
No. 96-6151 affirmed and No. 96-6432 dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Jerry Sawyer, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
2 PER CURIAM:
In No. 96-6151, Appellant appeals the district court's order
denying his application to proceed in forma pauperis. We find that
the denial of leave to appeal was not an abuse of discretion.
Williams v. Field, 394 F.2d 329 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 891 (1965). Accordingly, we affirm.
In No. 96-6432, Appellant appeals from the district court's
order declining to rule on the motions he filed after filing his
appeal in No. 96-6151. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988), and certain interlocu-
tory 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. 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.
No. 96-6151 - AFFIRMED No. 96-6432 - DISMISSED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sawyer v. Alexander, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sawyer-v-alexander-ca4-1996.