Walton v. Tidewater VA Federal ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 95-2562
    EARL C. WALTON, Agent; CARL L.       PHILLIPS,
    Agent; CHARLES A. BROWN, Agent,
    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    TIDEWATER VIRGINIA FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL
    TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    JOHN H. DALTON, Secretary of the Navy,
    Defendant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge.
    (CA-94-967)
    Submitted:   January 23, 1996          Decided:     February 13, 1996
    Before HALL, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Thomas Francis Hennessy, III, SuAnne Leigh Hardee, Chesapeake,
    Virginia, for Appellants. Sally Momsen Tedrow, Robert Matisoff,
    O'DONOGHUE & O'DONOGHUE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Appellants seek to appeal an order of the district court dis-
    missing Tidewater Virginia Federal Employees Metal Trades Council,
    AFL-CIO (the Union), from this proceeding. The action continues
    against John H. Dalton, Secretary of the Navy. The Union has moved
    to dismiss the appeal. We grant the motion for lack of jurisdic-
    tion. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders,
    
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
     (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral
    orders, 
    28 U.S.C. § 1292
     (1988); 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 grant the Union's motion to dismiss and 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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 95-2562

Filed Date: 2/13/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021