William A. Dunbar, Iii, Plaintiff Appellant, v. Carrol Heath, Aiken County Sheriff, in His Individual Andofficial Capacities; David Neens, Investigator, Aikencounty Sheriff's Department, in His Individual and Officialcapacities; Becky Edmonds, Investigator, Aiken Countysheriff's Department, in Her Individual and Officialcapacities; Lonnie Mccartney, Jail Administrator, Aikencounty Detention Center, in His Individual and Officialcapacities, Defendants Appellees,andvirginia Harris, Aiken County Public Defender, in Herindividual and Official Capacities; Bill Hart,investigator, Aiken County Public Defender's Office, in Hisindividual and Official Capacities, Defendants, 42 F.3d 1385 (4th Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit - 42 F.3d 1385 (4th Cir. 1994) Submitted: Nov. 17, 1994. Decided: Dec. 7, 1994

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., District Judge. (CA-93-153-3-OBD)

William A. Dunbar, III, Appellant Pro Se. John Gregg McMaster, Jr., TOMPKINS & MCMASTER, Columbia, SC; Robert Eric Petersen, SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Columbia, SC, for Appellees.

D.S.C.

DISMISSED.

Before RUSSELL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:


Appellant appeals the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This Court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.