# Michael Brown v. Cathy Johnson

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · November 20, 2014 · 585 F. App'x 204

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2753759

## Case

- **Full name:** Michael W. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cathy H. JOHNSON; Monta Davis Oliver, Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** November 20, 2014
- **Citations:** 585 F. App'x 204
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Niemeyer, Motz, Gregory
- **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/2753759

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1864

MICHAEL W. BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CATHY H. JOHNSON; MONTA DAVIS OLIVER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-00432-NCT-LPA)

Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: November 20, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael W. Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Michael W. Brown seeks to appeal a memorandum opinion

and order of the magistrate judge recommending the dismissal of

his civil action 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). The order Brown seeks to appeal is neither a final

order nor an interlocutory or collateral order subject to appeal

in this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2012); Fed. R. Civ.

P. 72(a). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction. As we lack jurisdiction over the appeal, we deny

Brown’s motion for relief from judgment. 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2753759. Public record. Not legal advice.