Harksen v. Unnamed

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

June 19, 2002

Case

Harksen v. Unnamed

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

PER CURIAM. Robb M. Harksen appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice some but not all of Harksen’s claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp.2001). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (1994); Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 , 69 S.Ct. 1221 , 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The order here appealed is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. We deny Harksen’s motion for a ruling on a motion in the district court. 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.…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.