U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2000

Spence v. Dewalt

Spence v. Dewalt
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided June 5, 2000

Spence v. Dewalt

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6045

HENRY LOTSON SPENCE, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

STEPHEN DEWALT, Warden, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-99-807)

Submitted: May 25, 2000 Decided: June 5, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Henry Lotson Spence, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Henry Lotson Spence, Sr., appeals the magistrate judge’s order conditionally filing his complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. 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 and deny Spence’s motion to appoint counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.