Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Arthur Hill v. Equifax Information Services, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Arthur Hill's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order Hill sought to appeal was neither a final order ending the case nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As such, the Court of Appeals did not have authority to hear the appeal under federal law, which only allows appeals of final orders and certain specified non-final orders. The court therefore dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Arthur Hill v. Equifax Information Services, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Arthur Hill's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order Hill sought to appeal was neither a final order ending the case nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As such, the Court of Appeals did not have authority to hear the appeal under federal law, which only allows appeals of final orders and certain specified non-final orders. The court therefore dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-09-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-1823

    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 Arthur Hill's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order Hill sought to appeal was neither a final order ending the case nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As such, the Court of Appeals did not have authority to hear the appeal under federal law, which only allows appeals of final orders and certain specified non-final orders. The court therefore dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    Arthur Hill v. Equifax Information Services, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Arthur Hill's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order Hill sought to appeal was neither a final order ending the case nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As such, the Court of Appeals did not have authority to hear the appeal under federal law, which only allows appeals of final orders and certain specified non-final orders. The court therefore dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    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. 13-1823

    ARTHUR HILL,
    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
    William L. Osteen,
    Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:11-cv-00107-WO-LPA)

    Submitted:

    August 29, 2013

    Decided: September 3, 2013

    Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and, KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Arthur Hill, Appellant Pro Se.


    Keasha Ann Broussard, Barry
    Goheen, KING & SPALDING, LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Arthur Hill seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying Hills motion to vacate various text orders, to exclude
    a witness declaration, objecting to the magistrate judges order
    denying

    Hill

    leave

    reconsideration

    of

    to

    the

    amend,

    objecting

    magistrate

    judges

    to

    and

    order

    seeking

    granting

    the

    Defendants motion to extend page limits, and Hills motion to


    disqualify the district court judge.

    This court may exercise

    jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2006),


    and

    certain

    interlocutory

    and

    collateral

    orders,

    28

    U.S.C.

    1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus.


    Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949).
    to

    appeal

    is

    neither

    final

    interlocutory or collateral order.


    appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    order

    The order Hill seeks


    nor

    an

    appealable

    Accordingly, we dismiss the

    We dispense with oral argument

    because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented


    in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
    the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like