Case ID: f-appx_48/html/0881-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eric MURPHY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PEUMANSEND CREEK REGIONAL JAIL, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 02-7279.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 10, 2002.
    Decided Oct. 21, 2002.
    
      Eric Murphy, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Eric Murphy appeals the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his § 1983 action. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 892, 10 F.3d 1064,1066-67 (4th Cir.1993).

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.