Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01014/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01014-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
FNU Childs
Appellee
City of Charlotte, North Carolina

FNU Moss
Appellee
FNU Paulk
Appellee
FNU Sergeant
Appellee
FNU Smereka

FNU Smith
Appellee
FNU Taylor
Appellee
FNU Trimmer
Appellee
Victor B. White
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1014

VICTOR B. WHITE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FNU TAYLOR; FNU MOSS; FNU SERGEANT; FNU SMITH; FNU PAULK; 

FNU CHILDS; FNU TRIMMER,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

FNU SMEREKA; CITY OF CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

District Judge. (3:09-cv-00257-FDW-DCK)

Submitted: February 22, 2010 Decided: March 9, 2010

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Victor B. White, Appellant Pro Se. David John Adinolfi, II, 

Special Deputy Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina; Sean 

Francis Perrin, WOMBLE, CARLYLE, SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC, 

Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Appeal: 10-1014 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/09/2010 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-1014 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/09/2010 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Victor B. White seeks to appeal the district court’s 

text orders dismissing some, but not all defendants, and denying 

reconsideration in this civil rights action. This court may 

exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 

(2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial 

Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The orders White 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 the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 10-1014 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/09/2010 Pg: 3 of 3