Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Willis v. Dept of Transportation, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    This document summarizes an unpublished ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Daniel Johnson Willis v. Department of Transportation et al. The court dismissed Willis' appeal of the district court's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. The court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order denying counsel was not a final decision and did not fall under any exceptions allowing interlocutory appeals. As such, the court denied Willis' motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-12-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-1676

    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    This document summarizes an unpublished ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Daniel Johnson Willis v. Department of Transportation et al. The court dismissed Willis' appeal of the district court's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. The court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order denying counsel was not a final decision and did not fall under any exceptions allowing interlocutory appeals. As such, the court denied Willis' motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views3 pages

    Willis v. Dept of Transportation, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes an unpublished ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of Daniel Johnson Willis v. Department of Transportation et al. The court dismissed Willis' appeal of the district court's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel. The court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order denying counsel was not a final decision and did not fall under any exceptions allowing interlocutory appeals. As such, the court denied Willis' motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the appeal.

    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. 07-1676

    DANIEL JOHNSON WILLIS,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    and
    JONES
    COUNTY
    INCORPORATED,

    IMPROVEMENT

    ASSOCIATION,
    Plaintiff,

    versus
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; LYNDO TIPPETT,
    As Secretary; CAM MCRAE, As Public Official;
    JAY CONVERSE, As Private Individuals And/Or
    Their Successors; TANDS INCORPORATION, As
    Private Individuals And/Or Their Successors,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
    District Judge. (4:07-cv-00046-FL)

    Submitted:

    November 21, 2007

    Decided:

    December 11, 2007

    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Daniel Johnson Willis, Appellant Pro Se. Scott A. Conklin, NORTH


    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Nicole A.
    Crawford, BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON, HUMPHREY & LEONARD, Greensboro,
    North Carolina; John W. Ormand, III, BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON,
    HUMPHREY & LEONARD, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Daniel

    Johnson

    Willis

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts order denying his motion for appointment of counsel.

    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 Willis seeks to

    appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or


    collateral order.
    Cir.

    1987)

    (an

    See Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 967 (4th


    order

    denying

    appointment

    of

    counsel

    is

    not

    reviewable by interlocutory appeal). Accordingly, we deny Williss


    motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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