Wojcicki v. Aiken Technical College

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 21, 2011
Docket10-1901
StatusUnpublished

This text of Wojcicki v. Aiken Technical College (Wojcicki v. Aiken Technical College) 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
Wojcicki v. Aiken Technical College, (4th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1901

JOSEPH WOJCICKI,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

AIKEN TECHNICAL COLLEGE; SUSAN A. WINSOR, ex Graham ATC president; WILLIAM TILT, Associate Vice President of Technical Education; THOMAS DESROCHER, Program Coordinator; LEE POWELL, Human Resources Director,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (1:06-cv-00461-HFF-PJG)

Submitted: March 2, 2011 Decided: March 21, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and AGEE and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Wojcicki, Appellant Pro Se. Charles J. Boykin, Shunna T. Vance, BOYKIN & DAVIS, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Joseph Wojcicki seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny

his motions for default judgment or, in the alternative, for

summary judgment, and denying reconsideration of that order.

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P.

54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541

(1949). The orders Wojcicki seeks to appeal are neither final

orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.

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

Related

Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.
337 U.S. 541 (Supreme Court, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Wojcicki v. Aiken Technical College, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wojcicki-v-aiken-technical-college-ca4-2011.