From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilson v. Ferrell

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jul 13, 1984
738 F.2d 637 (4th Cir. 1984)

Opinion

No. 83-1952.

Argued March 5, 1984.

Decided July 13, 1984.

James L. Mann, II, Columbia, S.C. (Mann Rickborn, Columbia, S.C., James M. Shoemaker, Jr., Frank S. Holleman, III, Wyche, Burgess, Freeman Parham, Greenville, S.C., on brief), for appellants,

Fletcher N. Smith, Jr., Greenville, S.C. (Theo W. Mitchell, Mitchell, Smith Pauling, Greenville, S.C., on brief), for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (82-3270)

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.


Upon further consideration of the facts, issues, and course of proceedings to date in this action, we are of opinion that permission to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) was improvidently granted.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

We have been advised that the claims of the Wilsons against appellants Accomondo and O'Neill have been settled, but do not act on their motion for dismissal under Fed.R.App.P. 42(b) because the entire appeal has been dismissed. The parties should notify the district court of their settlement agreement for entry of an appropriate order in that court.


Summaries of

Wilson v. Ferrell

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jul 13, 1984
738 F.2d 637 (4th Cir. 1984)
Case details for

Wilson v. Ferrell

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS WILSON AND CAROLYN WILSON, APPELLEES v. JAMES P. FERRELL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jul 13, 1984

Citations

738 F.2d 637 (4th Cir. 1984)

Citing Cases

Kennedy v. St. Joseph's Ministries Inc.

” Id. Of course, the court of appeals may later dismiss the § 1292(b) appeal if it becomes apparent that…