Fonz Shepard v. Wilson County Detention Center, No. 18-6539 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6539 FONZ SHEPARD, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILSON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:17-ct-03204-BO) Submitted: September 27, 2018 Decided: October 11, 2018 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fonz Shepard, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Fonz Shepard seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012). 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, 545-46 (1949). Because it is possible that Shepard could cure the defects in his complaint through amendment to name a defendant amenable to suit, the order he seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Shepard to file an amended complaint. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, 807 F.3d 619, 630 (4th Cir. 2015). 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.