Cornell Daye v. David Ballard

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:11-cv-00106 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998746781]. Mailed to: Daye. [11-6958]

Appeal: 11-6958

Document: 14

Date Filed: 12/19/2011

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6958

CORNELL F. DAYE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DAVID
BALLARD,
Warden
(MOCC),
in
his
official
and
individual
capacities
(Defendant
#1);
JASON
COLLINS,
Associate Warden of Programs, in official and individual
capacities (Defendant #2); MARK CRAWFORD, Librarian, in his
official and individual capacities (Defendant #3); LT.
CURTIS DIXON, in his official and individual capacities
(Defendant #4),
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston.
Joseph R. Goodwin,
Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00106)

Submitted:

December 15, 2011

Decided:

December 19, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cornell F. Daye, Appellant Pro Se. Michael P. Addair, John P.
Fuller, BAILEY & WYANT, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6958

Document: 14

Date Filed: 12/19/2011

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Cornell F. Daye seeks to appeal the district court’s
order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate
judge and dismissing certain counts in Daye’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2006) complaint.
over

final

This court may exercise jurisdiction only

orders,

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, 545-46 (1949).
neither

a

final

order

nor

The order Daye seeks to appeal is
an

appealable

interlocutory

or

collateral order.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack

of jurisdiction.

We dispense with oral argument because the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

contentions

are

adequately

the

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

2