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)
18-6357•FRED A. SMITH, 201 John Mark Dial Dr. Columbia S.C. 29209 v. JOLEESA JAMES, 1330 Taylor St. Baptist Hospital Columbia S.C. 29201
18-6357Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 31, 2018
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6357
FRED A. SMITH, 201 John Mark Dial Dr. Columbia S.C. 29209,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOLEESA JAMES, 1330 Taylor St. Baptist Hospital Columbia S.C. 29201,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
Hill. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (0:18-cv-00482-MGL)
Submitted: July 26, 2018 Decided: July 31, 2018
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and FLOYD, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Fred A. Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Fred A. Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
complaint without prejudice. 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 Smith seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack
of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Smith to
amend his complaint. Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-25
(4th Cir. 2015). 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 AND REMANDED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.