Lorenzo Williams, Sr. v. Richard Newman, No. 13-6136 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6136 LORENZO DALE WILLIAMS, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RICHARD K. NEWMAN; M. BYRUM, Officer of Hopewell Police Department; S. PAK, Officer at Hopewell Police Department; W. BLANKENSHIP, Officer-Hopewell Police Department; KENNETH NYE, Judge; ANTHONY SLYVESTER; J. ARMSTEAD, Riverside Regional Jail; W. ALLEN SHARRETT, Judge - Hopewell Circuit Court; KAY H. RACKLY, Hopewell Circuit Court; JACQUELINE BARRETO, Crane-Snead & Associates, Inc.; ELBERT MUMPHERY, Hopewell Circuit Court; SAM CAMPBELL, Hopewell Circuit Court, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:12-cv-01475-AJT-TRJ) Submitted: May 23, 2013 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. AGEE, Decided: Circuit Judges, and Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. May 29, 2013 HAMILTON, Senior Lorenzo Dale Williams, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Lorenzo Dale Williams, Sr., seeks to appeal from the district court s order dismissing his claims against several of the Defendants, directing the correctional institution to provide Williams financial information, and directing Williams to provide additional information. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). seeks to appeal is neither a final interlocutory or collateral order. appeal for lack of jurisdiction. order The order Williams nor an appealable Accordingly, we dismiss the 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.