Tinsley v. Singleton ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7309
JAMES D. TINSLEY, a/k/a James D. Tinsley, II, a/k/a Jimmy
Tinsley, a/k/a Jimmy D. Tinsley, III,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
JAMES SINGLETON, Sheriff, Oconee County; GREG REED,
Detective Oconee County; DAVID SMITH, Detective Oconee
County; STEVE PRUITT, Major, Oconee County Detention Center;
PHYLLIS LOMBARD, Oconee County Administrator; OCONEE COUNTY;
JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-25; SCOTT ARNOLD, Investigator, OCSO;
JERRY MOSS, Sgt., OSCO; MARK LYLES, Sgt., OCSO; MIKE
MCGOWAN, OSCO; GENTRY HAWK, Sgt., OCSO,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Sol Blatt, Jr., Senior District
Judge. (8:08-cv-00532-SB)
Submitted: March 30, 2011 Decided: April 11, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James D. Tinsley, Appellant Pro Se. James Victor McDade, DOYLE,
O’ROURKE, TATE & MCDADE, PA, Anderson, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James D. Tinsley seeks to appeal the district court’s
order granting in part and denying in part his motion for
reconsideration of the district court’s order granting
Defendants’ summary judgment motion on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983(2006) claims. 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, 545-
46 (1949). The order Tinsley seeks to appeal is neither a final
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
2