James Bailey v. Nurse Brown

Filing 920091019

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6575 JAMES BAILEY, Plaintiff Appellant, v. NURSE BROWN, a/k/a Wanda Brown, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center; DOCTOR BYRD, a/k/a Elin Berg, Head Physician Doctor, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center; LIEUTENANT JARVIS, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center; ALVIN S. GLENN DETENTION CENTER, Director; HEALTH CARE PROVIDER, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center; HEAD MEDICAL DOCTOR, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (8:08-cv-00244-HFF) Submitted: October 15, 2009 Decided: October 19, 2009 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Bailey, Appellant Pro Se. Sarah Thomas Clemmons, Christopher Barton Major, G. Dewey Oxner, Jr., HAYNSWORTH, SINKLER & BOYD, PA, Greenville, South Carolina; Daniel Plyer, William Henry Davidson, II, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; Amanda R. Maybank, Roy Pearce Maybank, MAYBANK LAW FIRM, LLC, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: James order accepting Bailey the seeks to appeal the district court's and magistrate judge's recommendation dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint against all but one defendant, Nurse Brown, and ordering Bailey to show cause for his failure to effect service upon Nurse Brown. may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, This court 28 U.S.C. 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). Bailey seeks to appeal is neither a final The order nor an order appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?