Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02561/USCOURTS-ca4-15-02561-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 362
Nature of Suit: Medical Malpractice
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2561

ARMANDO DESPAIGNE ZULVETA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

STATE AUTOMOBILE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; PHILPOT LAW FIRM, 

PA; TC UNLIMITED INCORPORATED; STEADMAN HAWKINS CLINIC OF 

THE CAROLINAS; WILSON JONES CARTER & BAXLEY PA; ROBERT P. 

RESTREPO, JR.; STEPHEN R. BRUNER; IRVIN H. PHILPOT, III; TIM 

CASE; CURTIS ELLIOT; WESLEY J. SHULL,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (6:15-cv-02880-HMH-KFM)

Submitted: August 12, 2016 Decided: August 18, 2016

Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Armando Despaigne Zulveta, Appellant Pro Se. Phillip E. Reeves, 

GALLIVAN, WHITE & BOYD, PA, Greenville, South Carolina; Eric K. 

Englebardt, TURNER, PADGET, GRAHAM & LANEY, PA, Greenville, 

South Carolina; Timothy Alan Domin, CLAWSON & STAUBES, LLC, 

Charleston, South Carolina; James Ben Alexander, Kenneth Norman 

Shaw, HAYNSWORTH, SINKLER & BOYD, PA, Greensville, South

Appeal: 15-2561 Doc: 35 Filed: 08/18/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Carolina; Wilson Scarborough Sheldon, WILLSON JONES CARTER & 

BAXLEY, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-2561 Doc: 35 Filed: 08/18/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Armando Despaigne Zulveta seeks to appeal the district 

court’s orders adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendations 

to grant Defendants’ motion to file a late answer, deny 

Zulveta’s motion for default judgment, and grant motions to 

dismiss Zulveta’s claims against several Defendants. 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, 545-46 (1949). The 

orders Zulveta seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor 

appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 15-2561 Doc: 35 Filed: 08/18/2016 Pg: 3 of 3