Briggs v. City of Norfolk ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 03-1554
    DONNA M. BRIGGS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CITY OF NORFOLK, a municipal corporation,
    organized under the laws of the Commonwealth
    of Virginia; PAUL D. FRAIM, individually, and
    officially in his capacity as mayor of
    Norfolk;     KAMALA     HALLGREN      LANNETTI,
    individually, and officially as the former
    assistant attorney for the City of Norfolk;
    HAROLD P. JUREN, individually, and officially
    as the assistant city attorney for the City of
    Norfolk;   MELVIN   HIGH,    individually,  and
    officially as the chief of police for the City
    of Norfolk; JAMES BROWNLIE, individually, and
    officially as a lieutenant on the Norfolk
    police force; ALAN BOSTJANCIC, individually,
    and officially as a police officer for the
    City of Norfolk; MARK RAILLING, individually,
    and officially as a police officer of the City
    of Norfolk; R. K. ABBOTT, in his individual
    capacity; THOMAS BALDWIN, in his individual
    capacity; TWO UNNAMED POLICE OFFICERS OF THE
    NORFOLK POLICE DEPARTMENT, in their individual
    capacities;     JAMES     B.     OLIVER,   JR.,
    individually, and as the city manager of the
    City of Norfolk; JAYWARD HANNA, individually,
    and officially as lieutenant on the Norfolk
    police force; THOMAS SPRINGER, individually,
    and officially as a police officer for the
    City of Norfolk; JAMES PRENTICE, individually,
    and officially as a police officer for the
    City of Norfolk,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    2
    and
    LEONARD MERRITT, individually,
    Defendant,
    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
    Party in Interest,
    WACHOVIA BANK,
    Garnishee,
    THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; EVERETT A. MARTIN,
    JR., Judge of the Circuit Court for the City
    of Norfolk; PATRICK NORSK; BETTY BLACK;
    HONORABLE CHARLES CLOUD; MASON ANDREWS; DEBBIE
    MILLER; EUGENE REAGAN; MARVIN D. MILLER;
    CLIENTS AND PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS OF THE LAW
    OFFICES OF MARVIN D. MILLER; LAW OFFICES OF
    MARVIN D. MILLER; LOUIS N. JOYNES, II; JOYNES
    & GAIDIES LAW GROUP, PC; DALE GAUDING; DEREK
    YOUNG,
    Movants.
    No. 03-1810
    DONNA M. BRIGGS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    3
    CITY OF NORFOLK, a municipal corporation,
    organized under the laws of the Commonwealth
    of Virginia; PAUL D. FRAIM, individually, and
    officially in his capacity as Mayor of
    Norfolk;     KAMALA     HALLGREN       LANNETTI,
    individually, and officially as the former
    assistant attorney for the City of Norfolk;
    HAROLD P. JUREN, individually, and officially
    as the assistant city attorney for the City of
    Norfolk;   MELVIN   HIGH,    individually,   and
    officially as the chief of police for the City
    of Norfolk; JAMES BROWNLIE, individually, and
    officially as a lieutenant on the Norfolk
    police force; ALAN BOSTJANCIC, individually,
    and officially as a police officer for the
    City of Norfolk; MARK RAILLING, individually,
    and officially as a police officer of the City
    of Norfolk; R. K. ABBOTT, in his individual
    capacity; THOMAS BALDWIN, in his individual
    capacity; TWO UNNAMED POLICE OFFICERS OF THE
    NORFOLK POLICE DEPARTMENT, in their individual
    capacities;     JAMES     B.     OLIVER,    JR.,
    individually, and officially as the city
    manager of the City of Norfolk; JAYWARD HANNA,
    individually, and officially as lieutenant on
    the Norfolk police force; THOMAS SPRINGER,
    individually, and officially as a police
    officer for the City of Norfolk; JAMES
    PRENTICE, individually, and officially as a
    police officer for the City of Norfolk,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    LEONARD MERRITT, individually,
    Defendant,
    FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
    Party in Interest,
    4
    WACHOVIA BANK,
    Garnishee,
    THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH; EVERETT A. MARTIN,
    JR., Judge of the circuit Court for the City
    of Norfolk; PATRICK NORSK; CHARLES CLOUD;
    MASON ANDREWS; DEBBIE MILLER; EUGENE REAGAN;
    MARVIN D. MILLER; CLIENTS AND PROSPECTIVE
    CLIENTS OF THE LAW OFFICES OF MARVIN D.
    MILLER; LAW OFFICES OF MARVIN D. MILLER; LOUIS
    N. JOYNES, II; JOYNES & GAIDIES LAW GROUP, PC;
    DALE GAUDING; DEREK YOUNG,
    Movants.
    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
    Judge. (CA-98-288-2)
    Submitted:   August 19, 2003          Decided:   September 8, 2003
    Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Donna M. Briggs, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Brody Rashkind, Krista Ann
    Griffith, James Arthur Cales, III, FURNISS, DAVIS, RASHKIND &
    SAUNDERS, Norfolk, Virginia; Catherine Crooks Hill, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    5
    PER CURIAM:
    Donna M. Briggs seeks to appeal the district court’s orders
    imposing sanctions based on Briggs’ failure to comply with a
    protective order.   This court may exercise jurisdiction only over
    final orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     (2000), and certain interlocutory
    and collateral orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
     (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P.
    54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 
    337 U.S. 541
     (1949).
    The orders Briggs seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor
    appealable interlocutory or collateral orders.   See Fox v. Capital
    Co., 
    299 U.S. 105
    , 107 (1936); Law v. NCAA, 
    134 F.3d 1438
    , 1440
    (10th Cir. 1998); In re Licht & Semonoff, 
    796 F.2d 564
    , 568 (1st
    Cir. 1986).    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of
    jurisdiction. We also deny Briggs’ motion to supplement the record
    with the entire record of the district court, as the entire record
    is not necessary in this interlocutory appeal.    We likewise deny
    Briggs’ motion to recuse the judges of this court.     Finally, we
    deny the motion to expedite the appeal.     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
    6
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-1554

Filed Date: 9/8/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021