Unpublished Disposition Notice: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(C) States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for Establishing Res Judicata, Estoppel, or the Law of the Case and Requires Service of Copies of Cited Unpublished Dispositions of the Sixth Circuit. Jessie Mae Suttles, Administratix of the Estate of Wadie Suttles, Sr., Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Gene Roberts, Mayor; Loyce Thomas Kennedy; Chattanooga City Commission; Frank King, Dr.; Eugene Mccutcheon; Eugene Collins; Bill Vincent, Lt.; Mike Williams; Melvin Carson, Individually and in Their Official Capacities; City of Chattanooga, Tennessee; Jack Adams, Dr., (Former) County Coroner, Hamilton County, Tennessee, Defendants-Appellees., 876 F.2d 104 (6th Cir. 1989)

Federal Circuits, 6th Cir. (June 13, 1989)

Docket number: 89-5415
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/37261085
Id. vLex: VLEX-37261085

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

Before RALPH B. GUY and RYAN, Circuit Judges and DAVID D. DOWD, Jr., District Judge.*

ORDER

This matter is before the court upon consideration of appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. In particular, they maintain that appellant has attempted to take an appeal from a non-final order. Appellant has not responded to the motion to dismiss.

Review of the papers before the court indicates that appellant filed a civil rights complaint in the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on February 27, 1989. The district court then referred the case to a magistrate for the disposition of any pre-trial matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec . 636(b). Appellant, however, objected to that action and moved for the removal of the magistrate from any involvement in the case. The district court, denied that motion by order entered March 23, 1989 and appellant filed this appeal.

This court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Specifically, appellate jurisdiction is generally limited to the review of final judgments and certain specified interlocutory orders. 28 U.S.C. Secs . 1291 and 1292. The district court's order denying appellant's motion to withdraw the reference of her cause of action to a magistrate is not included in the first of those categories as it clearly is not a final judgment disposing of the case on the merits. Neither is the order a fit subject for interlocutory review. In re Dalton, 733 F.2d 710, 714 (10th Cir.1984), cert. dismissed, 469 U.S. 1185 (1985); Loral Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 558 F.2d 1130, 1132 (2d Cir.1977).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss be granted. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Rule 8, Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

Other documents:
Smith v. Board of Trustees (4th Cir. 1998) | usa v. edin-alfonso martinez-espitia (11th cir. 2006) | Unpublished Disposition Notice Sixth Circuit Rule 24 C States that Citation of Unpublished Dispositions is Disfavored Except for E... | ORDRE de 3 de desembre de 1992, per la qual la CIRIT atorga una subvencio a favor de la Universitat de Barcelona per a l'adquisicio d'un equip d'e... | case of tribunal superior de justicia - bilbao, país vasco - sala de lo social, of june 20, 2000 | Orden MAM/1339/2003 de 10 de octubre por la que se aprueba la declaracion de prevalencia de la utilidad publica de la obra Variante de ... | case of tribunal superior de justicia - sevilla, andalucía nº 1304/2003, of april 04, 2003 | Edicto de 24 de septiembre de 2002 por el que se comunica a la empresa Cu... | epps v wheeler 4th cir 1999