Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Trent v. Commonwealth of VA, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from John J. "Swartz" Trent of a district court order that dismissed the part of Trent's complaint seeking monetary damages. The appeals court found that 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 limited categories of interlocutory or collateral orders that can be appealed. As the order was neither final nor appealable, the court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Trent v. Commonwealth of VA, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from John J. "Swartz" Trent of a district court order that dismissed the part of Trent's complaint seeking monetary damages. The appeals court found that 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 limited categories of interlocutory or collateral orders that can be appealed. As the order was neither final nor appealable, the court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-11-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-2593

    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 an appeal from John J. "Swartz" Trent of a district court order that dismissed the part of Trent's complaint seeking monetary damages. The appeals court found that 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 limited categories of interlocutory or collateral orders that can be appealed. As the order was neither final nor appealable, the court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    Copyright:

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

    Trent v. Commonwealth of VA, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from John J. "Swartz" Trent of a district court order that dismissed the part of Trent's complaint seeking monetary damages. The appeals court found that 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 limited categories of interlocutory or collateral orders that can be appealed. As the order was neither final nor appealable, the court dismissed the appeal as interlocutory.

    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. 98-2593

    JOHN J. SWARTZ TRENT,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.
    (CA-98-72-L)

    Submitted:

    November 3, 1998

    Decided:

    November 13, 1998

    Before HAMILTON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    John J. Trent, Appellant Pro Se. James Walter Hopper, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    John J. Swartz Trent appeals the district court order dismissing that part of his complaint seeking monetary damages. We
    dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is
    not appealable. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). This court may exercise
    jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (1994), and
    certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292
    (1994); 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
    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

    You might also like