Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

35 F.3d 556

Docket No. 94-6693.

Rites Hines v. A Lanham L

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted July 19, 1994. Decided August 18, 1994.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Hicks v. South Carolina Department of Corrections

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 2020

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

501994200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Alexander Harvey II, Senior District Judge. (CA-94-1429-H).

Leo Rites, Appellant Pro Se.

D.Md.

DISMISSED.

Before HALL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying Appellant's request for a temporary restraining order. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292 (1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

¶2

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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

/35/f3d/556 · .json · Public domain