Michael Hepstall v. US, No. 22-6108 (4th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 22-6108 MICHAEL LOUIS HEPSTALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Joseph Dawson, III, District Judge. (8:20-cv-00877-JD-JDA) Submitted: June 28, 2022 Decided: July 1, 2022 Before NIEMEYER and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Louis Hepstall, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Louis Hepstall seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendations to grant Defendant’s partial motion to dismiss Hepstall’s claims, brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680, and deny Hepstall’s motion to grant relief on the pleadings. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order Hepstall seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We therefore dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. 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.
