Tyrone Roberson v. Anthony Padula, No. 13-7897 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7897 TYRONE LAMAR ROBERSON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. ANTHONY J. PADULA, Warden Lee Corrections Institution; MAJOR JAMES DEAN; LIEUTENANT A. DAVIS; LIEUTENANT ERNEST MIMS; SERGEANT B. COOK; SERGEANT K. ARENS; MS. FULTON, Medical Health Care Provider RN; RN MS. JUDY RABON; RN MS. MCDONALD; MS. KELA E. THOMAS, Commission of Probation Parole and Pardon Services Director; WILLIAM BYARS, JR., SCDC Director, et al; SOUTH CAROLINA STATE BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD COMMITTEE; WILLIAM F. MARSCHER, III, SC Commission on Indigent Defense; FREDERICK M. CORLEY, Esquire; RANDOLPH MURDAUGH, III, Solicitor Attorney for the State; WILLIAM T. HOWELL, Judge of the 14th Judicial Circuit Court of SC; J. MCREE, MD, KCI Pharmacy; JUANITA MOSS, Food Service Supervisor; MS. BELL, Food Service Supervisor; MS. NORMAN, Food Service Supervisor; MS. ANDERSON, Food Service Supervisor, Defendants Appellees, and SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (2:13-cv-01872-RMG-BHH) Submitted: April 24, 2014 Decided: April 28, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tyrone Lamar Roberson, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Parker McLean, CLARKE, JOHNSON, PETERSON & MCLEAN, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Tyrone court s order Lamar adopting Roberson the seeks report to and appeal the district recommendation of the magistrate judge, and dismissing his complaint without prejudice against certain defendants. 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 (1949). Because the case is ongoing in the district court against the remaining defendants, the order Roberson seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. we dismiss the appeal for lack of Accordingly, jurisdiction and deny Roberson s objection to the Appellees disclosure of corporate affiliations. 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 3

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.