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.
Thomas Raymond FIRRIOLO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, State of South Carolina, Employees, et al.; Lieutenant Elizabeth Corley, (SLED) South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, State of South Carolina; Mark Keel, Chief of (S.L.E.D.), Law Enforcement Division, State of South Carolina; Paul Grant, Assistant Chief, South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, State of South Carolina; City of Greenville, Employees; Mr. Brad Rice; Mr. Jeff Bowen; Mr. Gary Fenell; Ms. Jodie Dudash; Mr. Bobbie Skinner; Ms. Cyntha Vilardo; MS. Tommy, of Greenville Cares (Jane Doe), Defendants-Appellees.
Thomas Raymond Firriolo seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his civil complaint. 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). Because it is possible that Firriolo could cure the defects in his complaint through amendment, the district court's order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc'y, 807 F.3d 619, 623-25, 628-30 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Firriolo to file an amended complaint. We deny Firriolo's motions to appoint counsel, to order an investigation, and to subpoena records, as well as his recent motion for an extension of time to file additional supplemental briefs in this appeal.
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 AND REMANDED
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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. 18-1461
Decided: October 25, 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)