Applying Dupree to Part of a Summary-Judgment Denial
In Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Edwards, the Ninth Circuit applied the Supreme Court’s decision in Dupree v. Younger to permit review of part of a summary-judgment denial. In the course of doing so, the court rejected the argument that the denied summary-judgment motion needed to have been potentially dispositive as to the need for a trial.
The Summary-Judgment Denial in Cottonwood Environmental
Simplifying a fair bit, Cottonwood Environmental involved two theories of recovery under the Clean Water Act: a direct-discharge theory, and an indirect-discharge theory. The district court rejected the direct-discharge theory at summary judgment, concluding that the theory “failed as a matter of law as applied to the undisputed facts.” But the plaintiff could proceed to trial on its indirect-discharge theory. After the plaintiff lost at trial, it appealed the district court’s rejection of the direct-discharge theory.
Preserving Purely Legal Issues via Summary-Judgment Denials
The Ninth Circuit determined that it had jurisdiction over that issue. The denial of summary judgment normally does not preserve an issue for appeal after a trial on the merits. Preservation instead comes via motions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50. But the Supreme Court held in Dupree that a denied summary-judgment motion can preserve purely legal issues. And the district court’s rejection of the direct-discharge theory involved a purely legal issue: the district court held that the theory failed without any reference to disputed facts.
Preserving Some Issues
The Ninth Circuit added that the denied summary-judgment decision need not have been potentially dispositive. “[S]electively quote[ing] dicta” from a pre-Dupree decision, the appellee had argued that summary-judgment denials are not appealable unless the decision—had it gone the other way—would “have completely obviated the need for a trial.”
The Ninth Circuit said that Dupree foreclosed this “all-or-nothing approach to appellate review of summary judgment denials”:
Dupree makes clear that a reviewing court may review some issues contained in a summary judgment denial, and not others.
So the Ninth Circuit could review the portion of the summary-judgment denial that rejected the direct-discharge theory.
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. Edwards, 2023 WL 8043823 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2023), available at the Ninth Circuit and Westlaw
Final Decisions PLLC is an appellate boutique and consultancy that focuses on federal appellate jurisdiction. We partner with lawyers facing appellate-jurisdiction issues, working as consultants or co-counsel to achieve positive outcomes on appeal. Contact us to learn how we can work together.
Learn More ContactRelated Posts
In McGruder v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville & Davidson County, the Sixth Circuit said that it would address a judicial-estoppel defense raised for the first time after the defendant had filed its notice of appeal. The Sixth Circuit framed this issue as one implicating the content and timing requirements for a notice of appeal. The […]
Continue reading....
I’ve been following the circuit split over preserving purely legal issues via denied summary-judgment motions for some time. Now, the Supreme Court has finally resolved it. In Dupree v. Younger, the Court held that a denied summary-judgment motion preserves a purely legal issue. Litigants thus do not need to re-raise those issues in post-trial motions […]
Continue reading....
The Supreme Court held in Ortiz v. Jordan that parties cannot appeal evidence-sufficiency issues raised in a denied summary-judgment motion after a trial on the merits. Parties must instead raise issues with the sufficiency of the trial evidence via a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50. But Ortiz left open the possibility that […]
Continue reading....
The Supreme Court held in Ortiz v. Jordan that parties cannot appeal evidence-sufficiency issues raised in a denied summary-judgment motion after a trial on the merits. Parties must instead raise issues with the sufficiency of the trial evidence via a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50. But Ortiz left open the possibility that […]
Continue reading....
As a general rule, parties cannot appeal an order denying summary judgment after a case proceeds to a full trial. In such a case, the trial record supersedes the summary-judgment record. So any questions about the sufficiency of the evidence at summary judgment become more or less moot; what matters is the sufficiency of the […]
Continue reading....Recent Posts
May saw several decisions on effective injunction denials. One of those decisions raised an interesting question about the Supreme Court’s test for when a district court order effective denies a preliminary injunction. In other developments, the Fifth Circuit sat en banc to jettison its rule barring review of waiver-based remands. Other decisions addressed the finality […]
Continue reading....
In Heidi Group, Inc.v. Texas Health and Human Services Commission, the Fifth Circuit reviewed the denial of federal and state immunities but declined to exercise pendent appellate jurisdiction over other issues. In the course of doing so, one judge questioned the collateral-order doctrine’s application to state immunities, and the entire court questioned the doctrine of […]
Continue reading....
The Supreme Court granted cert in GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal. The case asks if defendants can immediately appeal from the denial of derivative sovereign immunity via the collateral-order doctrine. I wrote about the petition and the underlying circuit split earlier this year. And I wrote about the Tenth Circuit decision from which the petition stems […]
Continue reading....
Injunction appeals have been in the spotlight of late. We’ve seen a few recent decisions on appeals from temporary restraining orders. And this month has already produced three cases involving effective denials of preliminary injunctions. One of these cases raised a question about the test for effective—and thus appealable—injunction denials. Under the Supreme Court’s decision […]
Continue reading....
In Abraham Watkins Nichols Agosto Aziz & Stogner v. Festeryga, the en banc Fifth Circuit held that 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) does not bar review of waiver-based remands. In so holding, the court overruled its decision in In re Weaver.
Continue reading....