Tyrone HURT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. All Past to Present Mayors, across this nation; All Mothers and Fathers of the Past to the Present, across this nation; All Survivors of the Past to The Present, across this nation; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dylann Roof, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dylann Roof; Eric Holt; Holt and White, Council & Concerned Citizen; G.O.P. Republicans; United States House of Representatives; the Country of Germany; the American College Dictionary, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. International Criminal Court (1946), Hague, Germany; International Peace Court (1946), Hague, Germany; KKK, across this nation, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The South Carolina Hate, within this nation; Including the Chief of Police, and all law enforcement officials, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. International Criminal Court (1946); International Peace Court, Hague, Germany (1946); Narcotic Agents (1972), Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chief of Police, and all law enforcement officers, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 7th District, D.C. Metropolitan; Police Departments; D.C. Council, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The International Criminal Court-1946-(Hague, Germany); The International Peace Court-1946-(Hague, Germany), Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The State of Virginia; Narcotic Agents (1972), Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The Center of The World; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The American Civil Liberties Union, Defendant-Appellee; Tyrone Hurt, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. Constitution; DR. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.; International Criminal Court, (1946 Hague, Germany); International Peace Court, (1946 Hague, Germany); American People, in American cities; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2016-05-02No. Nos. 15-2230, 15-2231, 15-2233, 15-2234, 15-2235, 15-2236, 15-2237, 15-2238, 15-2241, 15-2242, 15-2243, 15-2244, 15-2246, 15-2249, 15-2250, 15-2251

647 F. App'x 251

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Hurt appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012) and directing Hurt to show cause why a prefiling injunction should not issue. We dismiss the appeal.

With respect to the dismissal of these actions as frivolous, we have reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Hurt v. City of St. Louis, No. 5:15-cv-00310-D; Hurt v. All Past to Present Mayors, No. 5:15-cv-00322-D; Hurt v. Roof, Nos. 5:15-cv-00335-D, 5:15-cv-00336-D; Hurt v. Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00337-D; Hurt v. The South Carolina Hate, No. 5:15-cv-00341-D; Hurt v. Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00342-D; Hurt v. Chief of Police, No. 5:15-cv-00356-D; Hurt v. 7th District, No. 5:15-cv-00409-D; Hurt v. Int’l Criminal Court, No. 5:15-cv-00412-D; Hurt v. United States, No. 5:15-cv-00413-D; Hurt v. Virginia, Nos. 5:15-cv-00416-D; Hurt v. The Center of the World, No. 5:15-cv-00440-D; Hurt v. United States, No. 5:15— cv-00469-D; Hurt v. ACLU, No. 5:15-cv-00470-D; Hurt v. U.S. Constitution, No. 5:15-cv-00487-D (E.D.N.C. Sept. 23, 2015).

The district court also directed Hurt to show cause why a prefiling injunction should not issue. Rather than respond to the court’s order, Hurt filed his notice of appeal. 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, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). The show cause order Hurt seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

We deny leave to proceed in forma pau-peris and the motion to amend or correct. 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.