Gerald Henneghan v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 1949 . The

07-1265Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 8, 2007

Full text

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-1265
GERALD HENNEGHAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SIGNET CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC; SIGNET
REALTY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LLC; SIGNET
REALTY - BEALMONT 8&9, LLC; CH BUILDERS LLC;
LOUIS J. CLEMENTE; MARK A. HIGGS; JOHNNY D.
MOSELEY; MARK A. BLANCHIETTI HOLLANDER,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (1:06-cv-01443-LMB)
Submitted: July 20, 2007 Decided: August 8, 2007
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gerald Henneghan, Appellant Pro Se. Lauri Elizabeth Cleary, LERCH,
EARLY & BREWER, CHARTERED, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Gerald Henneghan seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing his civil complaint with respect to some
Defendants and granting Henneghan ten days to amend his complaint
with respect to the remaining Defendant. 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 Henneghan seeks to appeal is
neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral
order. 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
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.