Court Opinion

ID: 9945473
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-27 21:01:06.85019+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:33.734113
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1681      Doc: 14         Filed: 02/26/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1681

        EDWARD ILLSLEY,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        TRUIST BANK,

                             Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:23-cv-00097-BO-RJ)

        Submitted: February 22, 2024                                 Decided: February 26, 2024

        Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Edward Thomas Illsley, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Gerald Cahill, Caroline P. Mackie,
        POYNER SPRUILL LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1681       Doc: 14        Filed: 02/26/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Edward Thomas Illsley seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing one of

        the two claims Illsley raised in his complaint. Appellee moves to dismiss the appeal for

        lack of jurisdiction.

               This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and

        certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen

        v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Illsley seeks to

        appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

        Accordingly, we grant Appellee’s motion and 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

                                                    2