Hammond v. Garraghty

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Hammond v. Garraghty, 57 F. App'x 169 (4th Cir. 2003)

Hammond v. Garraghty

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth A. Hinton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to join an action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). 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 *170(2000); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Hinton seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Bhd. of R.R. Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 331 U.S. 519, 524-25, 67 S.Ct. 1387, 91 L.Ed. 1646 (1947) (finding that denial of motion for permissive intervention not immediately appealable). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We deny Hinton’s motion to expedite as moot. 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.

Reference

Full Case Name
Kenneth N. HAMMOND Charles Edward Forrester, Jr. Phillip Duckett v. David A. GARRAGHTY, Warden District of Columbia Agencies United States Parole Commission Anthony Williams, Mayor Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Chairman, United States Parole Commission Odie Washington, in his official capacity as Director, D.C. Department of Corrections John Ashcroft, Attorney General v. Kenneth A. Hinton, Movant-Appellant, Orlando R. Willis Bey, Movant
Status
Published