Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • George Evans v. Guilford County Detention, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from George Reynold Evans. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over Evans' appeal because the order he sought to appeal, a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As the district court had not yet ruled on Evans' objections or issued a final order, the appeals court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-09-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-2174

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from George Reynold Evans. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over Evans' appeal because the order he sought to appeal, a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As the district court had not yet ruled on Evans' objections or issued a final order, the appeals court 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
    7 views2 pages

    George Evans v. Guilford County Detention, 4th Cir. (2015)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from George Reynold Evans. The court found that it did not have jurisdiction over Evans' appeal because the order he sought to appeal, a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, was neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. As the district court had not yet ruled on Evans' objections or issued a final order, the appeals court 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 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-2174

    GEORGE REYNOLD EVANS,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    GUILFORD COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; B. J. BARNES; SGT.
    LANIER; OFFICER MANGUM; GUILFORD COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
    N. Carlton Tilley,
    Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-00499-NCT-JEP)

    Submitted:

    August 18, 2015

    Decided:

    September 18, 2015

    Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    George Reynold Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Livingston


    Mason, GUILFORD COUNTY SHERIFFS ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North
    Carolina; John Mark Payne, COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE, Greensboro,
    North Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    George Reynold Evans seeks to appeal the magistrate judges
    report and recommendation in this action filed under 42 U.S.C.
    1983 (2012).

    This court may exercise jurisdiction only over

    final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory


    and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P.
    54(b); Cohen

    v.

    545-46 (1949).

    Beneficial

    Indus.

    Loan

    Corp.,

    337

    U.S.

    541,

    The order Evans seeks to appeal is neither a

    final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *


    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
    dispense

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    According to the district courts docket sheet, Evans has


    filed
    objections
    to
    the
    magistrate
    judges
    report
    and
    recommendation.
    However, the district court has not yet ruled
    on the ojections or issued a final order.

    You might also like