TRUMAN v. Mr. Heath, Magistrate, Defendant. (2020)
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Cecil Guy TRUMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Mr. FRYE, Sergeant; Mr. McDougal, Correctional Officer; Mr. Farley, Correctional Officer, Defendants - Appellees, Mr. Heath, Magistrate, Defendant.
Decided: June 30, 2020
Before WYNN, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Cecil Guy Truman, Appellant Pro Se.
Cecil Guy Truman seeks to appeal the district court's orders granting Appellees’ motion to dismiss his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018) complaint for failure to state a claim and denying Truman's motion for reconsideration. Although “[t]he parties to this appeal have not questioned our jurisdiction ․, we have an independent obligation to verify the existence of appellate jurisdiction” and may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted); see 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2018); 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). “Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all parties.” Porter, 803 F.3d at 696 (emphasis and internal quotation marks omitted). “Regardless of the label given a district court decision, if it appears from the record that the district court has not adjudicated all of the issues in a case, then there is no final order.” Id.
In this case, the district court failed to address Truman's claims that Jordan McDougal violated his rights under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Because the district court did not rule on those claims, it “never issued a final decision” in this matter. Id. at 699. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the district court for consideration of Truman's remaining claims. We express no opinion on the ultimate disposition of those claims, and we deny Truman's motion to appoint counsel. 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
Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.