Leo McClam v. Janice Thomas, No. 14-7150 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7150 LEO MCCLAM, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JANICE THOMAS, RN; DR. REDDY; DR. MCDONALD; DISHA DAVE, Social Worker; DR. JOSE CHAVEZ; DR. CRISPLAND GRINN; MR. JAMES, MHS; KIA WILSON; CARLA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (3:13-cv-01682-TLW) Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: November 21, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leo McClam, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Leo McClam appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation without prejudice of his the 42 magistrate U.S.C. § judge 1983 and (2012) dismissing complaint and amended complaints. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over 28 final orders, 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 McClam may proceed with his claims by filing another complaint and providing factual allegations specifying how the named defendants violated his constitutional rights, the order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order with respect to those interlocutory or collateral order. claims nor an appealable See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, jurisdiction. we dismiss the appeal for lack of 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 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.