Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 17 views

    Jarvis v. Grady Management, Incorporated, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding two cases, No. 10-1451 and No. 10-1550, brought by Derek N. Jarvis and Shirley J. Pittman. In case No. 10-1451, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, as the district court's order directing the plaintiffs to file a supplemental complaint was not a final order. In case No. 10-1550, the court denied the plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court judge's recusal, as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances warranting mandamus relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Jarvis v. Grady Management, Incorporated, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    17 views4 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding two cases, No. 10-1451 and No. 10-1550, brought by Derek N. Jarvis and Shirley J. Pittman. In case No. 10-1451, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, as the district court's order directing the plaintiffs to file a supplemental complaint was not a final order. In case No. 10-1550, the court denied the plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court judge's recusal, as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances warranting mandamus relief.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-08-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-1451

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding two cases, No. 10-1451 and No. 10-1550, brought by Derek N. Jarvis and Shirley J. Pittman. In case No. 10-1451, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, as the district court's order directing the plaintiffs to file a supplemental complaint was not a final order. In case No. 10-1550, the court denied the plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court judge's recusal, as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances warranting mandamus relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    17 views4 pages

    Jarvis v. Grady Management, Incorporated, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding two cases, No. 10-1451 and No. 10-1550, brought by Derek N. Jarvis and Shirley J. Pittman. In case No. 10-1451, the court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, as the district court's order directing the plaintiffs to file a supplemental complaint was not a final order. In case No. 10-1550, the court denied the plaintiffs' petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court judge's recusal, as the plaintiffs did not demonstrate extraordinary circumstances warranting mandamus relief.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-1451

    DEREK N. JARVIS; SHIRLEY J. PITTMAN,


    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    v.
    GRADY MANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED; DUFFIE, INCORPORATED; APRIL
    LANE JOINT VENURES; MONTGOMERY COUNTY GOVERNMENT/MONTGOMERY
    COUNTY EXECUTIVE; MONTGOMERY COUNTY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
    AFFAIRS OFFICE; MONTGOMERY COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    Peter J. Messitte, Senior District
    Judge. (8:09-cv-00280-PJM)

    No. 10-1550

    In Re:

    DEREK N. JARVIS; SHIRLEY J. PITTMAN,


    Petitioners.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

    Submitted:

    August 26, 2010

    (8:09-cv-00280-PJM)

    Decided:

    August 31, 2010

    Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    No.
    10-1451
    dismissed;
    No.
    unpublished per curiam opinion.

    10-1550

    petition

    denied

    by

    Derek N. Jarvis, Shirley J. Pittman, Appellants/Petitioners Pro


    Se.
    Charles Lowell Frederick, COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE,
    Rockville, Maryland; Edward P. Henneberry, ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
    SUTCLIFFE, LLP, Washington, DC; John Benjamin Raftery, OFFIT
    KURMAN, PA, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Derek N. Jarvis and Shirley J. Pittman appeal from the
    district courts order, in their civil action, directing them to
    file a supplement to their amended complaint that contains a
    short, plain statement of facts, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
    8(a)(2).

    Appellants seek to appeal this order.

    This court may

    exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. 1291


    (2006),

    and

    certain

    interlocutory

    and

    collateral

    orders,

    28

    U.S.C. 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial


    Indus.

    Loan

    appealed

    Corp.,

    is

    337

    neither

    U.S.
    a

    541,

    final

    interlocutory or collateral order.

    545-46

    (1949).

    The

    order

    nor

    appealable

    an

    order

    Accordingly, we dismiss the

    appeal for lack of jurisdiction.


    Appellants

    have

    also

    filed

    petition

    for

    writ

    of

    mandamus seeking this court to compel the district court judge


    to recuse himself from their proceeding below.

    Mandamus relief

    is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the


    relief sought.

    In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn, 860 F.2d

    135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).

    Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy

    and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances.


    United

    States

    Dist.

    Court,

    426

    U.S.

    394,

    Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).


    made such a showing.
    of mandamus.

    402

    (1976);

    Kerr v.
    In

    re

    Appellants have not

    Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts


    3

    and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials


    before

    the

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional

    process.
    No. 10-1451 DISMISSED
    No. 10-1550 PETITION DENIED

    You might also like