Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Dennis O'Keith Blackwell v. State of North Carolina Chuck Gentry Linwood Clayton Dennis Cauley Joel Brewyer Bruce Ragan, 25 F.3d 1038, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    This document is a court case ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal from Dennis O'Keith Blackwell of a district court's order that dismissed portions of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court rules it lacks jurisdiction because the district court's order was not a final order or an appealable interlocutory order. Therefore, the appeals court dismisses the appeal as interlocutory. It also denies several motions filed by the appellant.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1994-06-13 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 25 F.3d 1038 Docket: 93-7271

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a court case ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal from Dennis O'Keith Blackwell of a district court's order that dismissed portions of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court rules it lacks jurisdiction because the district court's order was not a final order or an appealable interlocutory order. Therefore, the appeals court dismisses the appeal as interlocutory. It also denies several motions filed by the appellant.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    14 views2 pages

    Dennis O'Keith Blackwell v. State of North Carolina Chuck Gentry Linwood Clayton Dennis Cauley Joel Brewyer Bruce Ragan, 25 F.3d 1038, 4th Cir. (1994)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court case ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. It dismisses an appeal from Dennis O'Keith Blackwell of a district court's order that dismissed portions of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The appeals court rules it lacks jurisdiction because the district court's order was not a final order or an appealable interlocutory order. Therefore, the appeals court dismisses the appeal as interlocutory. It also denies several motions filed by the appellant.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    25 F.

    3d 1038
    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished
    dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law
    of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the
    Fourth Circuit.

    Dennis O'Keith BLACKWELL, Plaintiff Appellant,


    v.
    STATE of North Carolina; Chuck Gentry; Linwood Clayton;
    Dennis Cauley; Joel Brewyer; Bruce Ragan,
    Defendants Appellees.
    No. 93-7271.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted May 24, 1994.
    Decided June 13, 1994.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of
    North Carolina, at Durham. Paul Trevor Sharp, Magistrate Judge. (CA-93295-1).
    Dennis O'Keith Blackwell, appellant Pro Se.
    Jacob Leonard Safron, Special Deputy Atty. Gen., Raleigh, NC; William
    C. Morgan, Jr., Michael B. Brough & Associates, Chapel Hill, NC; Allan
    R. Gitter, Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, Winston-Salem, NC, for
    appellees.
    M.D.N.C.
    DISMISSED.
    Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing portions of his 42 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction

    because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only
    over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and
    collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 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.
    2

    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.

    We also deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel, motion to amend


    his complaint, motion to file a supplemental complaint, and motion to add
    parties. Further, we deny his request for injunctive relief from the on-going
    state criminal procedures. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971)

    You might also like