Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

53 F. App'x 309

Sirleaf v. Boozer

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided December 30, 2002

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2002-12-30

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2003

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

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2002-12-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Momolu V.S. and Elouise A. Sirleaf seek to appeal the district court’s order denying reconsideration of an order striking their complaint and directing that they file an amended complaint within ten days. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order the Sirleafs seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, as the district court has yet to enter a final order in their case. 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.

¶2 DISMISSED.

/53/fappx/309 · .json · Public domain