Case Name: Derrance L. RAMSEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Danny BROWN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-21
Citations: 418 F. App'x 238
Docket Number: No. 08-6896
Parties: Derrance L. RAMSEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Danny BROWN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 418
Pages: 238–239

Head Matter:
Derrance L. RAMSEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Danny BROWN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-6896.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 6, 2010.
Decided: March 21, 2011.
Andrew F. Lindemann, Robert D. Garfield, Davidson & Lindemann, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Danny Brown, Jr., appeals the district court's order denying his motion for summary judgment on the grounds of qualified immunity. Brown takes issue with the district court's findings and contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because there are no genuine issues of material fact. However, the respective versions of the facts offered by the parties below were so divergent that judgment as a matter of law is precluded. And "a defendant, entitled to invoke a qualified immunity defense, may not appeal a district court's summary judgment order insofar as that order determines whether or not the pretrial record sets forth a 'genuine' issue of fact for trial." Culosi v. Bullock, 596 F.3d 195, 201 (4th Cir.2010) (quoting Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 319-20, 115 S.Ct. 2151, 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995)).
Accordingly, we dismiss this interlocutory 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.