Momolu Sirleaf v. David Robinson, No. 15-7834 (4th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7834 MOMOLU SIRLEAF, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DAVID ROBINSON, Chief of Operations, VDOC, sued individually and in official capacity; C. WALL, Chaplin, GraceInside Chaplin Services, Inc., sued individually and in official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, District Judge. (3:15-cv-00339-MHL-RCY) Submitted: April 8, 2016 Decided: May 5, 2016 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Momolu Sirleaf, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Momolu Sirleaf seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his action without prejudice for failing to pay an initial partial filing fee of $5.70. On appeal, Sirleaf has provided evidence that he did make the payment. Moreover, it appears that a payment of $5.70 was received by the district court and credited in another case. See Sirleaf v. Wall, No. 3:15-cv-00338-MHL-RCY (E.D. Va. Sept. 22, 2015 entry). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders of the district court, 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). is neither a final collateral order. order The order Sirleaf seeks to appeal nor an appealable interlocutory or See Goode v. Central Va. Legal Aid, 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions reinstate his case. facts and materials legal before to give Sirleaf an opportunity to We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. DISMISSED AND REMANDED 2

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.