Diana Houck v. Substitute Trustee Services, No. 13-2326 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on December 17, 2014.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on July 1, 2015.
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2326 DIANA LOUISE HOUCK; STEVEN G. TATE, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC., Defendant Appellee, and LIFESTORE BANK; GRID FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. David S. Cayer, Magistrate Judge. (5:13-cv-00066-DSC) Submitted: July 28, 2014 Before KEENAN Circuit Judge. and FLOYD, Decided: Circuit Judges, and August 27, 2014 DAVIS, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Shane Perry, COLLUM & PERRY, Mooresville, North Carolina, for Appellants. Jeffrey A. Bunda, HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Diana Louise Houck and Steven G. Tate seek to appeal the district court s order entered October 1, 2013, dismissing all claims as to one of the defendants in the underlying civil action. 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, 54546 (1949). The order appellants seek to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. * Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * We note that, after the notice of appeal was filed, the district court entered orders dismissing claims against the remaining two defendants. Under the doctrine of cumulative finality, see Equip. Fin. Grp., Inc. v. Traverse Computer Brokers, 973 F.2d 345, 347-48 (4th Cir. 1992), it is possible to cure the jurisdictional defect resulting from the appeal of a non-final order if the district court enters final judgment prior to this court s consideration of the appeal. However, because at least some claims against defendant Lifestore Bank are still pending in the district court, a final order has not yet been entered. 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.
