Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Crisp v. NC Department Corr, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    35 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Taurice Crisp's appeal of a district court order requiring prison officials to deduct a percentage of his monthly income to pay filing fees. The appeals court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the categories of appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-09-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7131

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Taurice Crisp's appeal of a district court order requiring prison officials to deduct a percentage of his monthly income to pay filing fees. The appeals court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the categories of appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

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

    Crisp v. NC Department Corr, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Taurice Crisp's appeal of a district court order requiring prison officials to deduct a percentage of his monthly income to pay filing fees. The appeals court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's order was not a final judgment and did not fall into the categories of appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. The appeal was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-7131

    TAURICE M. CRISP,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS;
    DOCTOR BOWMAN; MR. MUNNS; DOCTOR SHODELL,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Louise W. Flanagan,
    District Judge. (CA-04-343-5-FL)

    Submitted:

    September 16, 2004

    Decided:

    September 24, 2004

    Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Taurice M. Crisp, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Taurice M. Crisp seeks to appeal the district courts
    order directing prison officials to deduct a percentage of his
    monthly income from his prison account to pay the filing fee.

    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 order Crisp 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 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 -

    You might also like