Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Notice: This Summary Order May Not Be Cited As Precedential Authority, but May Be Called to the Attention of the Court in a Subsequent Stage of This Case, in a Related Case, or in Any Case for Purposes of Collateral Estoppel or Res Judicata. See Second Circuit Rule 0.23.josefina Del Valle Hernandez, Plaintiff-appellant, v. the New York City Law Department Corporation Counsel, Cityof New York, Bonnie Bornstein, Allyson Piscitelli,eugene Borenstein, Edward I. Liebermanand Felicia Dunn-jones,defendants-appellees
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. - 107 F.3d 2
Jan. 28, 1997
Appearing for Appellant: Josefina Del Valle Hernandez pro se, Bronx, N.Y.
Appearing for Appellees: Janet L. Zaleon, Ass't NYC Corporation Counsel, N.Y., N.Y.
Present Hon. Amalya L. KEARSE, Hon. Dennis G. JACOBS, Circuit Judges, Hon. John GLEESON, District Judge*.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was argued by plaintiff pro se and by counsel for defendants.
ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the appeal be and it hereby is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
Plaintiff Josefina Del Valle Hernandez attempts to appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Allen G. Schwartz, Judge, denying her request for certification pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) for immediate appeal of the court's order denying Hernandez's motion to amend her complaint. An order denying certification under § 1292(b) is an interlocutory order that is not appealable. See generally D'Ippolito v. Cities Service Co., 374 F.2d 643, 648 (2d Cir.1967). Accordingly, we have no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Nor would review by way of mandamus be appropriate. See id.
We have considered all of Hernandez's contentions in support of appealability and have found them to be without merit. The appeal is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction.