Wayne Gordon v. Leon Regan

Fifth Circuit

Wayne Gordon v. Leon Regan

669 F. App'x 249

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 5, 2016

Docket16-30280 Summary Calendar

StatusUnpublished

This text of 669 F. App'x 249 (Wayne Gordon v. Leon Regan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wayne Gordon v. Leon Regan, 669 F. App'x 249 (5th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Wayne Gordon appeals, pro se, from a magistrate judge’s order deferring initial disclosures and the district court’s without-prejudice dismissal conditioned on execution of settlement agreement. The Court’s examination of the record reveals that there is no such order by a magistrate judge, and even if there were, it is not a final judgment and was not appealed to the district court. 1 Moreover, the district court’s dismissal from which Gordon appeals was a dismissal without prejudice as the district court retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement. 2 Even if we construe Gordon’s appeal to be from the district court’s final dismissal with prejudice, he consented to that dismissal as a term of the settlement he agreed to. 3 Thus, this Court lacks jurisdiction. The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cm. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

.28 U.S.C. § 1291; Central Progressive Bank v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 658 F.2d 377, 383 (5th Cir. 1981).

2

. LeCompte v. Mr. Chip, Inc., 528 F.2d 601, 603 (5th Cir. 1976).

3

. Tel-Phonic Services, Inc. v. TBS Int’l, Inc., 975 F.2d 1134, 1137 (5th Cir. 1992).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Wayne Gordon appeals, pro se, from a magistrate judge’s order deferring initial disclosures and the district court’s without-prejudice dismissal conditioned on execution of settlement agreement. The Court’s examination of the record reveals that there is no such order by a magistrate judge, and even if there were, it is not a final judgment and was not appealed to the district court. 1 Moreover, the district court’s dismissal from which Gordon appeals was a dismissal without prejudice as the district court retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement. 2 Even if we construe Gordon’s appeal to be from the district court’s final dismissal with prejudice, he consented to that dismissal as a term of the settlement he agreed to. 3 Thus, this Court lacks jurisdiction. The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cm. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

.28 U.S.C. § 1291; Central Progressive Bank v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 658 F.2d 377, 383 (5th Cir. 1981).

2

. LeCompte v. Mr. Chip, Inc., 528 F.2d 601, 603 (5th Cir. 1976).

3

. Tel-Phonic Services, Inc. v. TBS Int’l, Inc., 975 F.2d 1134, 1137 (5th Cir. 1992).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

669 F. App'x 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wayne-gordon-v-leon-regan-ca5-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack