Alonzo Key v. State of South Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [998727535-2] Originating case number: 1:11-cv-01613-DCN-JRM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998788113]. Mailed to: Key. [11-7295]

Appeal: 11-7295

Document: 12

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7295

ALONZO KEY,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE OF; AIKEN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT;
BADGE 450 PHILLIP S. MIANO; BADGE 545 MATHEW BARNWELL;
BADGE 520 CPL SPANN; BADGE 159 CPL SMITH; CPL EAGERTON,
Officers of Aiken Department of Public Safety,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken.
David C. Norton, District Judge.
(1:11-cv-01613-DCN-JRM)

Submitted:

February 9, 2012

Decided:

February 14, 2012

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alonzo Key, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7295

Document: 12

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Alonzo Key seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing Defendants State of South Carolina and Aiken Police
Department without prejudice from Key’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006)
proceeding.

This

court

may

exercise

jurisdiction

only

over

final 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).

The order Key seeks to appeal is neither a final

order

appealable

nor

an

interlocutory

or

collateral

order.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

We

deny Key’s motion for a transcript at Government expense.

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

2