Eddie Golson v. James Anderson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to amend/correct [999818710-2] Originating case number: 3:15-cv-04319-MBS Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999864695]. Mailed to: Eddie Golson. [16-6193]

Appeal: 16-6193

Doc: 14

Filed: 06/23/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6193

MR. EDDIE C. GOLSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JAMES B. ANDERSON; JAMES R. METTS; BRIAN P. STERLING;
STEPHANIE WILLIS; MARY ANN E. SHEHA; NANCY J. SKRABA; ROBERT
L. SINGLETON; BRIAN CURRENCE,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia.
Margaret B. Seymour, Senior
District Judge. (3:15-cv-04319-MBS)

Submitted:

June 16, 2016

Decided:

June 23, 2016

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded
curiam opinion.

with

instructions

by

unpublished

per

Eddie C. Golson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6193

Doc: 14

Filed: 06/23/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Eddie C. Golson seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing without prejudice his civil action for failing to
plead,

as

to

cognizable

several

claim

for

counts,

sufficient

relief.

This

facts
court

to

state

may

a

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, 545-47 (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 could amend the complaint to
cure the pleading deficiency.

Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid

Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 624-25 (4th Cir. 2015).
The order Golson seeks to appeal is neither a final order
nor

an

appealable

Accordingly,

we

deny

interlocutory
Golson’s

motion

or
to

collateral
amend

his

order.
informal

brief, dismiss the appeal, and remand the case to the district
court with instructions to allow Golson leave to file an amended
2

Appeal: 16-6193

Doc: 14

complaint.
legal
before

Pg: 3 of 3

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
this

Filed: 06/23/2016

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
DISMISSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS

3