Gary Alan Glass v. Anne Arundel County
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:12-cv-01901-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [15-2594]
Pg: 1 of 4
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
GARY ALAN GLASS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY; MARK COLLIER, Individually and in his
official capacity as an Anne Arundel County Police Officer;
JAMES E. TEARE, SR., Individually and in his official
capacity as an Anne Arundel County Chief of Police; UNKNOWN
COUNTY EMPLOYEE X,
Defendants - Appellees,
JAMES SCOTT DAVIS, Individually and in his official capacity
as an Anne Arundel County Police Department Lieutenant;
CHRISTINE RYDER, Individually and in her official capacity
as an Anne Arundel County Police Department Central Records
Manager; BRENDA FRASER, Individually and in her official
capacity as an Anne Arundel County Police Department Central
Records Deputy Manager; JOHN GILMER, Individually and in his
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
December 16, 2016
Before KING, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
January 18, 2017
Pg: 2 of 4
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cary J. Hansel, HANSEL LAW, PC, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Nancy McCutchan Duden, County Attorney, Jay H.
Creech, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Annapolis, Maryland,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 3 of 4
Gary Alan Glass seeks to appeal the district court’s order
granting judgment as a matter of law to Mark Collier, one of
addressing the merits of Glass’ appeal, we first must be assured
that we have jurisdiction.
(4th Cir. 2015).
Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696
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, 54546 (1949).
“Ordinarily, a district court order is not final
until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.”
803 F.3d at 696 (internal quotation marks omitted); see Fed. R.
Civ. P. 54(b).
Generally, “a final decision is one that ends
the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to
do but execute the judgment.”
Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v. Cent.
Pension Fund of Int’l Union of Operating Eng’rs & Participating
Emp’rs, 134 S. Ct. 773, 779 (2014) (internal quotation marks
Here, the district court stayed Glass’ claim against Anne
complaint, and proceeded to discovery and trial on Glass’ claim
After the court granted judgment as a matter
of law to Collier, the court’s written order entered judgment in
Pg: 4 of 4
Although the district court’s order closed the case, “even if a
district court believes it has disposed of an entire case, we
lack appellate jurisdiction where the court in fact has failed
to enter judgment on all claims.”
Porter, 803 F.3d at 696-97;
see also Lamp v. Andrus, 657 F.2d 1167, 1169 (10th Cir. 1981),
(“Rule 54(b) . . . does not contemplate ‘implicit adjudication’
district court’s order is silent as to the stayed claim, the
order Glass seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an
appealable interlocutory or collateral order.
See Porter, 803
F.3d at 699; see also Penn-Am. Ins. Co. v. Mapp, 521 F.3d 290,
closing a case does not amount to a final, appealable order).
We dispense with oral argument because the facts
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
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?