Althea Marie Hughes v. Bank of America


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999938102-3] Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00672-HEH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000015837]. Mailed to: Althea Marie Hughes P. O. Box 323 Prince George, VA 23875. [16-2026]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2026 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/02/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2026 ALTHEA MARIE HUGHES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:16-cv-00672-HEH) Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 2, 2017 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Althea Marie Hughes, Appellant Pro Se. Jr., SAMUEL I. WHITE, PC, Virginia Appellee. Ronald James Guillot, Beach, Virginia, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-2026 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/02/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Althea Marie Hughes seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (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). Because Hughes may be able to remedy the deficiencies identified by the district court by filing an amended complaint stating sufficient facts to support her claims, the order Hughes seeks to appeal is neither a final order. order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral Goode v. Central Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, 807 F.3d 619, 623- 24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Hughes to file an amended transcripts at complaint. government We expense. deny We Hughes’ dispense motion with for 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 AND REMANDED 2

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?