Court Opinion

ID: 9882031
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-04 21:00:50.319775+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:22:37.239238
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1457      Doc: 30         Filed: 10/03/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-1457

        SUZANNE SCIBEK, individually, and on behalf of her minor children, C.S., J.S.,
        E.S.; JACOB SCIBEK; J.S., a minor; E.S., a minor; C.S., a minor,

                            Plaintiffs - Appellants,

                     v.

        LAURA GEE GILBERT; CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY STORE, INC.,

                            Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:20-cv-02638-DCN)

        Submitted: January 13, 2023                                       Decided: October 3, 2023

        Before KING, WYNN, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Kevin B. Smith, Amanda R. Itterly, HOFFMEN LAW FIRM, LLC, North
        Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellants. Helen F. Hiser, James D. Smith, Jr.,
        MCANGUS, GOUDELOCK & COURIE, LLC, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, for
        Appellee Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. Michelle N. Endemann, CLARKSON
        WALSH & COULTER, PA, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee Laura Gee Gilbert.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1457       Doc: 30         Filed: 10/03/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Suzanne and Jacob Scibek sued Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. and one of

        its employees, Laura Gee Gilbert, after the Scibeks and Gilbert were involved in a vehicle

        collision. The Scibeks brought claims for negligence against Gilbert and Cracker Barrel

        as well as a claim for negligent hiring against Cracker Barrel. Cracker Barrel moved for

        summary judgment on the two claims against it; Gilbert did not move for summary

        judgment on the one claim against her. The district court granted summary judgment for

        Cracker Barrel, and the Scibeks appeal that order.

               We have 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, 545–546 (1949). Though the district court’s

        summary judgment order resolved the claims against Cracker Barrel, the claim against

        Gilbert remains pending in the district court. The court’s order, therefore, is neither a final

        order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order, and we must 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