Court Opinion

ID: 9389426
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-25 17:01:29.371853+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:26.941598
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1846      Doc: 17         Filed: 04/24/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-1846

        BRANDACE JARREAU ROSEVELT:HOPPER,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; LAWRENCE W. BLAKE, d/b/a Substitute Trustee
        Services, Inc.; HUTCHENS LAW FIRM; FRANK D. WHITNEY; HILTON TERRY
        HUTCHENS, JR.; ROCKET MORTGAGE, LLC; ELISA CHINN-GARY; DONALD C.
        COGGINS, JR.,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Charlotte. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (3:22-cv-00259-DCC-KFM)

        Submitted: April 20, 2023                                         Decided: April 24, 2023

        Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Brandace Jarreau Rosevelt:Hopper, Appellant Pro Se. Jeffrey Allen Bunda, HUTCHENS
        LAW FIRM, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1846      Doc: 17         Filed: 04/24/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Brandace Jarreau Rosevelt:Hopper seeks to appeal the orders issued in his pending

        civil action denying his motions for recusal of the district court and magistrate judges and

        denying his request for reconsideration of the orders denying recusal. 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 orders Rosevelt:Hopper 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 this court and

        argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                                     2