David MEYERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Gail JONES; Keith Dawkins; Carl Manis; Walter Swiney; P. Deel; Counselor Young, WRSP; U/M Collins; Chief of Housing and Programs; U/M Reynolds, WRSP; Investigator J. Fannin, ROSP; Investigator J. D. Bentley, ROSP; U/M Ely, WRSP; Assistant Warden Combs, WRSP; Investigator C. Flemings, WRSP; Investigator Lite, WRSP; Investigator Harris, WRSP; Assistant Warden J. Artrip, ROSP; Property Officer J. Farmer, ROSP; Property Officer J. Owens, ROSP; Property Officer Hounsell, WRSP; Sgt. Property Officer Short, WRSP; Property Officer Phillips, WRSP; C. R. Stanley, ROSP; Edward Gwinn, ROSP; Dr. Mullens, WRSP; Doctor Unknown, WRSP; Henry Ponton, Western Office; Dr. T. Huff, ROSP; Doctor Buchannan, Clinical Psychologist ROSP; McDuffey, QMPH-WRSP; Monahan, QMPH-WRSP; Julia C. Dudley, Clerk of U.S. District Court Roanoke Division; Pamela Sargent, U.S. Magistrate Judge of U.S. District Court Roanoke Div.; James Jones, U.S. District Judge of U.S. District Court Roanoke Div.; Lt. Hall, Building Supervisor WRSP; E. Cole, WRSP; M. Williams, WRSP; T. Dorton, Fiscal Tech ROSP; Glen Conrad, U.S. District Judge of U.S. District Court Roanoke Division; Marcus Elam; Nurse Morgan, RN WRSP; Counselor C. Caughron, Defendants – Appellees,
Wallens Ridge State Prison; T. B. Dye, Defendants. David Meyers, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Carl Manis; Counselor Young; Gail Jones; Kieth Dawkins; Chief of Housing of WRSP; Henry Ponton; J. Kiser; W. Swiney; Assistant Warden Combs; Chief of Security Maj. Anderson; ULM Collins; QMHP-Monahan; Counselor Caughron; A. Galihar, Defendants - Appellees.
David Meyers, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. P. Sargent; J. Kiser; U.S. Magistrate Judge Pamela Sargent; Assistant Attorney General Charisse Mullen; J. Fannin; J. D. Bentley; U/M Collins; W. Swiney, Defendants - Appellees.
No. 19-6906, No. 19-6908, No. 19-6922
Decided: September 04, 2019
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
David Meyers, Appellant Pro Se.
In these consolidated appeals, David Meyers, a Virginia inmate and three-striker, has filed a consolidated notice of appeal, but failed to designate the orders he seeks to appeal. We dismiss these appeals for lack of jurisdiction.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(1)(B), a notice of appeal must specify the judgment or order being appealed. We construe this rule liberally, “asking whether, the putative appellant has manifested the intent to appeal a specific judgment or order and whether the affected party had notice and an opportunity fully to brief the issue.” Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 176 (4th Cir. 2014). “This principle of liberal construction does not, however, excuse noncompliance” with Rule 3. Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248, 112 S.Ct. 678, 116 L.Ed.2d 678 (1992). Because the dictates of Rule 3 are jurisdictional, each requirement must be satisfied as a prerequisite to appellate review. Id. In his one-page consolidated notice of appeal, Meyers fails to designate the orders being appealed. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction.
Because Meyers failed to designate the orders being appealed, we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. We also deny as moot Meyers’ motions for leave to proceed on appeal without prepayment of fees under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 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 by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
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.