William Davis, II v. Albert Singer ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-1649
    WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, II;      BABY J.F.D., c/o William        S.
    Davis, II; ESTATE OF WILLIAM SCOTT DAVIS, SR., Deceased,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    v.
    ALBERT J. SINGER; WAKE COUNTY GOVERNMENT; DANIELLE DOYLE;
    SYDNEY J. BATCH; BATCH, POORE & WILLIAMS; MICHELE JAWORSKI
    SUAREZ; MELANIE A. SHEKITA; MICHELLE SAVAGE; ERIC CRAIG
    CHASSE; LISA SELLERS; CHARLOTTE MITCHELL; WENDY KIRWAN;
    SONJI CARLTON; NANCEY BERSON; SUSAN GARVEY, Doctor; ROBERT
    B. RADAR; MARGARET EAGLES; RICHARD CROUTHARMEL,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Newport News.     Rebecca Beach Smith,
    Chief District Judge. (4:13-cv-00007-RBS-DEM)
    Submitted:   June 20, 2013                   Decided:   June 25, 2013
    Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Scott Davis, II, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    William   Scott    Davis       seeks    to    appeal    the   district
    court’s order denying his motion for an order to file exhibits
    under   seal,    motions    to   appoint       counsel,      and     motions   for   a
    preliminary injunction and temporary restraining 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
    , 545-46 (1949).                        The
    order Davis 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 deny Davis’
    motion for the appointment of counsel.                     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
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-1649

Filed Date: 6/25/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014