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)
24-2187•Glenda Falwell; Kevin Falwell v. Michael L. Chapman
24-2187Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit19.05.2025
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-2187
GLENDA FALWELL; KEVIN FALWELL,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
MICHAEL L. CHAPMAN; LOUDOUN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT;
KELLY MAIO, MH Clinician; DR. RICHARD CONNOR; LOUDOUN COUNTY
MENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT; RASHIKA J. RENTIE; ERIC SHARINS;
KAREN E. KIRKPATRICK; BUTA BIBERAJ, Prosecutor; STEWART
MARCANTEL, Deputy; JUSTIN M. SPERLING, Deputy; BRANDON NOLAN,
Officer; VICTORIA C. DRONSICK, Magistrate,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:24-cv-01851-LMB-WBP)
Submitted: May 15, 2025 Decided: May 19, 2025
Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Glenda Falwell, Kevin Falwell, Appellants Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Glenda Falwell and Keith Falwell seek to appeal the district court’s order dismissing
their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint without prejudice and granting them leave to file an
amended complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order
Appellants seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order. See Britt v. DeJoy, 45 F.4th 790, 796 (4th Cir. 2022). 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.