The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
15-7626•Timothy Lamar Wallace v. ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III, Warden of Broad River Correctional Institution
15-7626Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 18, 2016
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7626
TIMOTHY LAMAR WALLACE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III, Warden of Broad River Correctional
Institution,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Kevin F. McDonald, Magistrate
Judge. (6:15-cv-02910-JMC-KFM)
Submitted: May 6, 2016 Decided: May 18, 2016
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Lamar Wallace, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Caroline M. Scrantom, OFFICE
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Lamar Wallace seeks to appeal the magistrate
judge’s Roseboro* notice order. 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). The order Wallace
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 this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED
* Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309, 310 (4th Cir. 1975)
(holding that before summary judgment is entered against a pro
se litigant, the court must notify him of his right to file
counteraffidavits or other appropriate materials, and give him a
reasonable opportunity to respond).
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.