Smith v. Houchens Industries

235 F. App'x 154
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 15, 2007·No. No. 07-1319·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Paul Vernon Smith seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation Smith 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 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

Smith v. Houchens Industries, 235 F. App'x 154 (4th Cir. 2007).

235 F. App'x 154 (Smith v. Houchens Industries) — 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)