Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1 views

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court ruling on a petition by Alvereze Bolden for permission to appeal an interlocutory order from a lower court ruling in his civil rights case. The appellate court denies the petition, finding that the lower court did not certify its order as appealable and that the order does not fall under the limited categories of interlocutory orders that can be appealed. As the issues have already been decided in a previous ruling, the court denies the petition without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document is a court ruling on a petition by Alvereze Bolden for permission to appeal an interlocutory order from a lower court ruling in his civil rights case. The appellate court denies the petition, finding that the lower court did not certify its order as appealable and that the order does not fall under the limited categories of interlocutory orders that can be appealed. As the issues have already been decided in a previous ruling, the court denies the petition without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1988-05-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 849 F.2d 604 Docket: 88-8007

    Original Title

    Alvereze Bolden, Plaintiff-Petitioner v. Edward W. Murray Saundra Hylton Thomas Israel Dr. Fox Nurse Murphy, Defendants-Respondents, 849 F.2d 604, 4th Cir. (1988)

    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 ruling on a petition by Alvereze Bolden for permission to appeal an interlocutory order from a lower court ruling in his civil rights case. The appellate court denies the petition, finding that the lower court did not certify its order as appealable and that the order does not fall under the limited categories of interlocutory orders that can be appealed. As the issues have already been decided in a previous ruling, the court denies the petition without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court ruling on a petition by Alvereze Bolden for permission to appeal an interlocutory order from a lower court ruling in his civil rights case. The appellate court denies the petition, finding that the lower court did not certify its order as appealable and that the order does not fall under the limited categories of interlocutory orders that can be appealed. As the issues have already been decided in a previous ruling, the court denies the petition without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    849 F.

    2d 604
    Unpublished Disposition

    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.
    Alvereze BOLDEN, Plaintiff-Petitioner,
    v.
    Edward W. MURRAY; Saundra Hylton; Thomas Israel; Dr.
    Fox;
    Nurse Murphy, Defendants-Respondents.
    No. 88-8007.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: April 27, 1988.
    Decided: May 31, 1988.

    Alvereze Bolden, appellant pro se.


    Richard Francis Gorman, III (Office of the Attorney General of Virginia),
    for appellees Murray, Hylton, and Israel.
    Mary Moffett Hutcheson Priddy (McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe), for
    appellees Fox and Murphy.
    Before K.K. HALL, SPROUSE and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Alvereze Bolden petitions this Court, pursuant to Rule 5(a), Federal Rules of
    Appellate Procedure, for permission to appeal an interlocutory order under 28
    U.S.C. Sec. 1292(b). Bolden has a 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 civil rights action
    pending in the district court. In response to Bolden's interrogatories, defendants
    Fox and Murphy moved for a protective order. The motion was granted by
    order entered January 26, 1988. Bolden previously appealed this protective

    order. Because it is an interlocutory order, we dismissed the appeal for lack of


    jurisdiction. Bolden v. Murray, No. 88-7044 (4th Cir. Apr. 11, 1988)
    (unpublished).
    2

    Rule 5(a), Fed.R.App.P., prescribes the procedure for taking an appeal from an
    interlocutory order which the district court has certified as appealable in
    accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292(b). As there has been no certification
    from the district court judge in this case, the order is not appealable under Rule
    5. We have already concluded in No. 88-7044 that the order is not a final
    decision under Sec. 1291, and that it does not fall in any of the categories of
    interlocutory orders appealable under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292(a). This order,
    therefore, is not properly before us.

    As the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively, we


    dispense with oral argument and deny the petition for permission to appeal.

    DENIED.

    You might also like