Christopher Odom v. State of South Carolina
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to amend/correct [999522032-2] Originating case number: 5:14-cv-02441-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999557860]. Mailed to: Odom. [14-7645]
Appeal: 14-7645
Doc: 28
Filed: 04/02/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7645
CHRISTOPHER ODOM,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TAXPAYERS;
CITY OF CHARLESTON TAXPAYERS; CITY OF NORTH CHARLESTON
TAXPAYERS; CARTA BUS; COUNTY OF CHARLESTON TAXPAYERS;
CHARLESTON COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE; SHERIFF AL
CANNON EMPLOYEES; SHERIFF AL CANNON; SHERIFF AL CANNON
DETENTION CENTER; CITY OF CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT;
CITY OF NORTH CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES; SOG, of Sheriff Al Cannon Detention
Center; GOVERNOR NIKKI HALEY; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
MENTAL HEALTH; G. WERBER BRYAN PSYCHOLOGICAL HOSPITAL; DR.
FERLANTO; DR. GRISWALD; CRAFTS FARROW STATE HOSPITAL; SCDMH
EMPLOYEES; SCDMH STAFF; SCDMH SECURITY; DHEC; CHAMPUS;
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA; JUST CARE; GEO;
CHARLESTON COUNTY SOLICITORS OFFICE; UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT; FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS; UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT; SOUTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS; DR. RUSSELL
KEITH;
J.
BENNICE;
DEFENDANTS
LIABILITY
INSURANCE
POLICYHOLDER;
ALAN
WILSON;
ALBERT
PIERCE;
SC
STATE
TREASURY; SCDMH HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (5:14-cv-02441-RMG)
Submitted:
March 23, 2015
Decided:
April 2, 2015
Appeal: 14-7645
Doc: 28
Before AGEE and
Circuit Judge.
Filed: 04/02/2015
KEENAN,
Pg: 2 of 3
Circuit
Judges,
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christopher A. Odom, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
Appeal: 14-7645
Doc: 28
Filed: 04/02/2015
Pg: 3 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Christopher
Odom
appeals
the
district
court’s
order
adopting in part the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing
without
prejudice
Odom’s
42
U.S.C.
§
1983
(2012)
complaint.
This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final
orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and
collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); Cohen
v.
Beneficial
Indus.
Loan
Corp.,
337
U.S.
541,
545-46 (1949).
Because Odom may proceed with his claims by
filing
complaint
another
and
providing
factual
allegations
specifying how the named defendants violated his constitutional
rights, the order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order
with respect to those claims nor an appealable interlocutory or
collateral order.
See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local
Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
motion
to
amend
his
claim.
We
dispense
with
Accordingly,
We deny Odom’s
oral
argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this 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?