Case ID: f-appx_21/html/0234-01.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

Leroy THURSTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOUISA COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant-Appellee. Leroy Thurston, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United Parcel Service; Roger Collins, Assistant Superintendent of Louisa County Schools, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 01-2156, 01-2157.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 8, 2001.
    Decided Nov. 15, 2001.
    Leroy Thurston, pro se.
    Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In these consolidated cases, Leroy Thurston appeals from the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice for failure to state a claim of an action brought against a former employer (No. 01-2156). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Thurston v. Louisa Cnty. Public Sch., No. CA-01-84-3 (W.D.Va. filed Aug. 27, 2001; entered Aug. 28, 2001). 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.

In No. 01-2157, Thurston appeals from the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his claims as to Defendant Collins for failure to state a claim, but allowing the action to proceed as to the Defendant United Parcel Service (No. 01-2157). 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. We dismiss this 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.

AFFIRMED.

DISMISSED.