Nicole McCrea v. Johns Hopkins Universities, No. 16-1954 (4th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1954 NICOLE RENA MCCREA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITIES, Office of Institutional Equity Vice Provost of Institutional Equity; JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITIES, Office of the Vice President and General Counsel; DEXTER SMITH; EILEEN HAASE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:15-cv-00579-JKB) Submitted: November 22, 2016 Before DIAZ and Circuit Judge. THACKER, Circuit Decided: Judges, November 29, 2016 and DAVIS, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nicole Rena McCrea, Appellant Pro Se. Elena D. Marcuss, Adam Thomas Simons, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nicole Rena McCrea seeks to appeal three of the magistrate judge’s discovery orders and the district court’s order denying her motion to certify an interlocutory appeal and for a stay pending appeal in her civil rights action. her notice of appeal, the district After McCrea filed court granted summary judgment for all Defendants and closed the case. 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). When a notice of appeal is premature, the entry of final judgment under the can doctrine cure of the resulting cumulative jurisdictional finality, but only defect if the appealed order could have been certified for intermediate appeal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). In re Bryson, 406 F.3d 284, 287-89 (4th Cir. 2005); Equip. Fin. Grp. v. Traverse Computer Brokers, 973 F.2d 345, 347 (4th Cir. 1992). The orders McCrea seeks to appeal are neither final orders nor appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. Further, because the district court could not have certified these orders for immediate appeal under Rule 54(b), the cumulative finality doctrine cannot apply. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 2 We deny McCrea’s motion for transcript at government expense and Defendants’ motion to place the case in abeyance. 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.
