U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2014

Leo McClam v. Janice Thomas

Leo McClam v. Janice Thomas
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided November 21, 2014 · Niemeyer, Motz, Gregory
585 F. App'x 231

Leo McClam v. Janice Thomas

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Leo McClam appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without *232 prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (2012) complaint and amended complaints. 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. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because McClam may proceed with his claims by filing another complaint and providing factual allegations specifying how the named defendants violated his constitutional rights, the order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order with respect to those claims nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

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