Stanley Linder v. Isaac Stone, III

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999748172-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-04619-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999838651]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-6029]

Appeal: 16-6029

Doc: 14

Filed: 06/01/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6029

STANLEY D. LINDER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ISAAC MCDUFFIE STONE, III, District Attorney; HARRIS BEACH,
Attorney; SEAN THORNTON, Solicitor; PATRICIA C. GRANT, Clerk
of Court,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (2:15-cv-04619-RMG)

Submitted:

May 26, 2016

Decided:

June 1, 2016

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit
Judges.

Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley D. Linder, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6029

Doc: 14

Filed: 06/01/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Stanley D. Linder seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint
for failing to plead, at least as to one count, sufficient facts
to state a claim.

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).
An order dismissing a complaint without prejudice is not an
appealable final order if “the plaintiff could save his action by
merely amending his complaint.”

Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar

Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).
Where a district court dismisses an action for failure to plead
sufficient facts in the complaint, we lack appellate jurisdiction
because

the

plaintiff

pleading deficiency.

could

amend

the

complaint

to

cure

the

Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc.,

807 F.3d 619, 624 (4th Cir. 2015).
Accordingly, we deny Linder’s motion to appoint counsel,
dismiss the appeal, and remand the case to the district court with
instructions to allow Linder to file an amended complaint.

We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

2

Appeal: 16-6029

Doc: 14

Filed: 06/01/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED AND REMANDED

3