Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
13-8026•Thomas N. Tweh v. Mr. Robert Green
13-8026Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit22.04.2014
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-8026
THOMAS N. TWEH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MR. ROBERT GREEN; CAPTAIN PAYNE; SERGEANT JEFFERS; CORPORAL
MUHAMMAD; SERGEANT TATE; DOCTOR DADGAR; MR. ANTHONY
STURGESS; DOCTOR DAVARIS; P.A. D. STANSBURY; SHERIFF DEPUTY
GREEN; SHERIFF DEPUTY SONGCO,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, District Judge.
(1:12-cv-02360-GLR)
Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas N. Tweh, Appellant Pro Se. Christine M. Collins, Edward
Barry Lattner, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland;
Jennifer L. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Thomas N. Tweh seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing Tweh’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) claims against
several Defendants and has filed a motion for appointment of
counsel. 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 (1949). Because Tweh’s claims against three Defendants
remain, the orders Tweh seeks to appeal are neither final orders
nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly,
we deny Tweh’s motion for appointment of counsel 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 this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.