# Ramsey v. Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 21, 2011 · 418 F. App'x 238

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/212893

## Case

- **Full name:** Derrance L. RAMSEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Danny BROWN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 21, 2011
- **Citations:** 418 F. App'x 238
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Wilkinson, Gregory, Hamilton
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/212893

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6896

DERRANCE L. RAMSEY,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DANNY BROWN, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:07-cv-00745-MJP)

Submitted: October 6, 2010 Decided: March 21, 2011

Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andrew F. Lindemann, Robert D. Garfield, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN,
P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Danny Brown, Jr., appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for summary judgment on the grounds of

qualified immunity. Brown takes issue with the district court’s

findings and contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity

because there are no genuine issues of material fact. However,

the respective versions of the facts offered by the parties

below were so divergent that judgment as a matter of law is

precluded. And “a defendant, entitled to invoke a qualified

immunity defense, may not appeal a district court’s summary

judgment order insofar as that order determines whether or not

the pretrial record sets forth a ‘genuine’ issue of fact for

trial.” Culosi v. Bullock, 596 F.3d 195, 201 (4th Cir. 2010)

(quoting Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 319-20 (1995)).

Accordingly, we dismiss this interlocutory appeal for

lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/212893. Public record. Not legal advice.