Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Clemons v. Bradley, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Clayton Clemons for lack of jurisdiction. The court notes that it can only hear appeals from final orders or certain interlocutory orders. The order Clemons sought to appeal from was a district court order granting an extension to file objections to a magistrate's report and denying a motion to subpoena. The Fourth Circuit found this was not a final or appealable interlocutory order, so it dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-06-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-2148

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Clayton Clemons for lack of jurisdiction. The court notes that it can only hear appeals from final orders or certain interlocutory orders. The order Clemons sought to appeal from was a district court order granting an extension to file objections to a magistrate's report and denying a motion to subpoena. The Fourth Circuit found this was not a final or appealable interlocutory order, so it 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
    5 views3 pages

    Clemons v. Bradley, 4th Cir. (2008)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Clayton Clemons for lack of jurisdiction. The court notes that it can only hear appeals from final orders or certain interlocutory orders. The order Clemons sought to appeal from was a district court order granting an extension to file objections to a magistrate's report and denying a motion to subpoena. The Fourth Circuit found this was not a final or appealable interlocutory order, so it 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. 07-2148

    CLAYTON CLEMONS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    J. N. BRADLEY, Corporal, South Carolina Highway Patrol; CHRIS
    SCALZO, Public Defender's Office; C. R. GARRETT, Judge,
    Greenville County Summary Court; PAUL B. WICKENSIMER,
    Greenville County Clerk of Court; ROBERT M. ARIAIL, Greenville
    County Solicitor; BARBARA H. TIFFIN, Assistant Solicitor;
    JOHN L. BREEDEN, Jr., Judge, Circuit Court Judge; JOSEPH L.
    SAVITZ, Chief Attorney, Division of Appellate Defense;
    KENNETH A. RICHSTAD, Clerk of South Carolina Court of Appeals;
    HAROLD MINCH COOMBS, Jr., Senior Assistant Attorney General;
    JASPER CURETON, AJ South Carolina Court of Appeals; KAYE
    GORENFLO HEARN, CJ South Carolina Court of Appeals; JEAN
    HOEFER TOAL, CJ South Carolina Supreme Court,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    v.
    HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General, South Carolina,
    Third Party Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (6:07-cv-03286-GRA)

    Submitted:

    June 19, 2008

    Decided:

    June 23, 2008

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Clayton Clemons, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Clayton Clemons seeks to appeal the district courts
    order granting his motion to extend time to file objections to the
    magistrate judges report and recommendation and denying his motion
    to subpoena.

    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 Clemons 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

    - 3 -

    You might also like