Case Name: John LASCHKEWITSCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-12-20
Citations: 671 F. App'x 230
Docket Number: No. 16-2003
Parties: John LASCHKEWITSCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before KING, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 671
Pages: 230–231

Head Matter:
John LASCHKEWITSCH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 16-2003
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: December 14, 2016
Decided: December 20, 2016
John B. Laschkewitsch, Appellant Pro Se. Kelly C. Hanley, Gilbert Charles Laite, III, Williams Mullen, Raleigh, North Carolina; Joseph Ray Pope, Williams Mullen, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before KING, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Laschkewitseh seeks to appeal the district court's order granting summary judgment against him. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order Laschkewitseh seeks to appeal, which decided the issue of liability but made clear that the district court had yet to conduct further proceedings to determine damages, attorney's fees, and costs, is neither a final order nor an ap-pealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wetzel, 424 U.S. 737, 744, 96 S.Ct. 1202, 47 L.Ed.2d 435 (1976); Dilly v. S.S. Kresge, 606 F.2d 62, 62-63 (4th Cir. 1979). Accordingly, we grant Appellee's motion to 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