Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Shaun BROWN; Jenever Brown; Jobs Virginia Community Development Corporation, Jobs, (Jobs), Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, (USDA); William Strong, in his official and individual capacity; Virginia Department of Health, (VDH), Defendants-Appellees.
Shaun Brown, Jenever Brown, and Jobs Virginia Community Development Corp. seek to appeal the district court's order denying their motion to appoint counsel. 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 Appellants seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 965 (4th Cir. 1987) (holding “that orders denying motions for appointment of counsel in civil cases are not subject to interlocutory appeals”).* 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
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE. Although the district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice before we considered this appeal, the doctrine of cumulative finality does not cure the jurisdictional defect. Equip. Fin. Grp., Inc. v. Traverse Comput. Brokers, 973 F.2d 345, 347-48 (4th Cir. 1992) (holding that doctrine of cumulative finality only applies where order appealed could have been certified under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) ); see In re Bryson, 406 F.3d 284, 288 (4th Cir. 2005) (noting that “a premature notice of appeal from a clearly interlocutory decision” cannot be saved under doctrine of cumulative finality (internal quotation marks omitted) ).
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 18-1182
Decided: May 29, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)