Myron Nunn v. NC Dept of Public safety
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999941254-2]. Originating case number: 5:16-ct-03058-FL. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000000920]. Mailed to: Myron Nunn & Lawrence Gilmartin. [16-7006]
Appeal: 16-7006
Doc: 29
Filed: 01/10/2017
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7006
MYRON RODERICK NUNN,
Appellant,
and
LAWRENCE P. GILMARTIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; DR.
MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, Greene Correctional Institution,
LAND;
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:16-ct-03058-FL)
Submitted:
December 20, 2016
Before WILKINSON and
Senior Circuit Judge.
NIEMEYER,
Decided:
Circuit
January 10, 2017
Judges,
and
HAMILTON,
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Myron Roderick Nunn, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7006
Doc: 29
Filed: 01/10/2017
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Myron Roderick Nunn seeks to appeal the district court’s
failure to rule on his motion to amend a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012)
complaint.
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).
order
nor
Nunn’s notice of appeal challenges neither a final
an
Accordingly,
appealable
we
deny
interlocutory
Nunn’s
motion
or
for
collateral
the
order.
appointment
counsel and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
dispense
with
contentions
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
of
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
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?