Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Okpala v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from O. Garry Okpala. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court orders Okpala sought to appeal - an order dismissing some claims and defendants and an order denying a Rule 59(e) motion - were not final orders or appealable interlocutory orders, but rather interlocutory orders in an ongoing civil rights case. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-04-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-7799

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from O. Garry Okpala. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court orders Okpala sought to appeal - an order dismissing some claims and defendants and an order denying a Rule 59(e) motion - were not final orders or appealable interlocutory orders, but rather interlocutory orders in an ongoing civil rights case. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    6 views3 pages

    Okpala v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from O. Garry Okpala. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the appeal because the district court orders Okpala sought to appeal - an order dismissing some claims and defendants and an order denying a Rule 59(e) motion - were not final orders or appealable interlocutory orders, but rather interlocutory orders in an ongoing civil rights case. Therefore, the Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 02-7799

    O. GARRY OKPALA,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United
    States; KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER, Director of the
    Federal Bureau of Prisons; STEVEN J. GAL,
    Warden
    of
    the
    Federal
    Correctional
    Institution, Estill, South Carolina; JOE
    SNODDY, Associate Warden, Federal Correctional
    Institution, Estill, South Carolina; BYRNE,
    Captain
    of
    the
    Federal
    Correctional
    Institution, Estill, South Carolina; GRUBBS,
    Counselor at Federal Correctional Institution,
    Estill, South Carolina; CARTHWRIGHT, Unit
    Manager at Federal Correctional Institution,
    Estill, South Carolina; RANEW, Corrections
    Officer at Federal Correctional Institution,
    Estill, South Carolina; ROBINSON, Corrections
    Officer at Federal Correctional Institution,
    Estill, South Carolina; JOHNSON, Corrections
    Officer at Federal Correctional Institution,
    Estill,
    South
    Carolina;
    KATHLEEN
    MACK,
    Supervisor
    of
    Education
    at
    Federal
    Correctional
    Institution,
    Estill,
    South
    Carolina;
    FOSSE,
    Lieutenant
    at
    Federal
    Correctional Institution, Estill, SC; ADDUCCI,
    Disciplinary Hearing Officer DHO at Federal
    Correctional
    Institution,
    Estill,
    South
    Carolina; UNKNOWN NAMED OFFICIALS, of the
    Federal Bureau of Prisons; FEDERAL BUREAU OF
    PRISONS; USA,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
    (CA-01-4252-0-25BD)

    Submitted:

    March 19, 2003

    Decided:

    April 17, 2003

    Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    O. Garry Okpala, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    O. Garry Okpala seeks to appeal the district courts order
    accepting the magistrate judges recommendation to dismiss some
    claims and defendants from his civil rights action and the courts
    order denying his motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).

    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 Okpala seeks to

    appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or


    collateral orders.

    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

    You might also like