Christopher Dolin v. Jordan Kindred, No. 19-2082 (4th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2082 CHRISTOPHER DOLIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JORDAN KINDRED; DEVIN HOLLAND; BILL WILSON; LIEUTENANT JONES; CAPTAIN ROCHELLE; MAJOR FLIPPIN; CAPTAIN WYCHE; PAMALA GILLEY; SERGEANT BROWN; KAREN CRAIG; WALTER MINTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, Senior District Judge. (3:19-cv-00537-HEH) Submitted: January 21, 2020 Decided: January 23, 2020 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Dolin, Appellant Pro Se. William Fisher Etherington, BEALE, DAVIDSON, ETHERINGTON & MORRIS, PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Christopher Dolin seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his complaint for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2018). We may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2018), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2018); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 (1949). Because the district court’s order suggests that Dolin could potentially cure the defects in the complaint identified by the district court, we conclude that the order Dolin seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory order. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623-24 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Dolin to amend his complaint. Goode, 807 F.3d at 630. 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 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.