Stanley Corbett, Jr. v. G. J. Branker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:13-ct-03201-BO. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999731477]. Mailed to: Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr. [15-7486]

Appeal: 15-7486

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/07/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7486

STANLEY EARL CORBETT, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
and
CHARDAN WHITEHEAD; TIJUAN WILSON; SAMUEL MCCRAE; BILLY JOE
RIDDLE; JOHN DAVIS; HASEEM EVERETT; JEROME PETERS,
Plaintiffs,
v.
G. J. BRANKER; SERGEANT PRADO; OFFICER LANCASTER; OFFICER
HOLLOMAN; OFFICER HICKS; OFFICER JAMES; KENNETH LASSITER;
MICHAEL NORRIS; BRENT SOUCIER; ARTHUR MARSH; OFFICER OATES;
OFFICER BIDWELL; MARCEL COLLEYMORE; OFFICER TYSON; OFFICER
ALEXANDER,
Defendants – Appellees,
and
SERGEANT REED; OFFICER MOORE; OFFICER PRESS;
SUMMERLIN; OFFICER LASSITER; JARED WELCH; BEN
OFFICER HUNT,

OFFICER
MORGAN;

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-ct-03201-BO)

Submitted:

January 5, 2016

Decided:

January 7, 2016

Appeal: 15-7486

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/07/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Judith Maria
Estevez, Assistant Attorney General, Donna Elizabeth Tanner,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-7486

Doc: 13

Filed: 01/07/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Stanley Earl Corbett, Jr., seeks to appeal the district
court’s

order

granting

the

Defendants’

motion

for

summary

judgment as to Corbett’s claims in a civil rights action brought
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012).

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).

The order Corbett

seeks

nor

to

appeal

is

neither

a

final

interlocutory or collateral order.
appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

order

an

appealable

Accordingly, we dismiss the

We dispense with 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