Watson v. Moore ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 99-7497
    ROBERT WATSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHAEL MOORE, Director, in his official and
    individual capacity; GERALDINE P. MIRO, Warden
    of Allendale Correctional Institution; CLAR-
    ENCE BENJAMIN, Captain; DOCTOR REGAN; DOCTOR
    DEVLIN; UNKNOWN DEFENDANTS,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.   Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
    (CA-97-3180)
    Submitted:   March 7, 2000                 Decided:   April 24, 2000
    Before WILKINS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Robert Watson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Senn, Charleston,
    South Carolina; William Henry Davidson, II, Phillip Florence, Jr.,
    DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Robert Watson appeals the district court’s order adopting the
    magistrate judge’s recommendation granting summary judgment and
    dismissing Defendant Regan from Watson’s suit under 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (1994).   We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction be-
    cause the order is not appealable.   This court may exercise juris-
    diction only over final orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     (1994), and cer-
    tain interlocutory and collateral orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
     (1994);
    Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 
    337 U.S. 541
     (1949).   The order here appealed is neither a final order
    nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
    We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-7497

Filed Date: 4/24/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014