Servidio v. Pittman

668 F. App'x 522
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided September 15, 2016·No. No. 16-6696·Published

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Servidio seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. 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 Servidio seeks to appeal [523] is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Servidio’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal 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

Servidio v. Pittman, 668 F. App'x 522 (4th Cir. 2016).

668 F. App'x 522 (Servidio v. Pittman) — 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)