Blog

The past several years have seen the courts of appeals struggling with their jurisdiction when plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss some of their claims without prejudice. Concerned that these plaintiffs are trying to manufacture an interlocutory appeal, the courts have developed a variety of rules on appealability. The Fifth Circuit, for example, requires that the would-be appellant obtain a partial judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).…

Last summer, the Eleventh Circuit heard an immediate appeal from a district court’s denial of what’s often called “Parker immunity.” This so-called immunity provides that the Sherman Act generally does not cover a state’s anticompetitive conduct. The case—SmileDirectClub, LLC v. Battle—produced three separate opinions on appealability. The majority and dissent argued over the application of the the rule allowing these appeals via the collateral-order doctrine.…

In a case from a few weeks ago that I just saw, the Fifth Circuit weighed in on the split over reviewing hardship determinations in immigration appeals. The court sided with the Sixth and Eleventh in treating hardship determinations as mixed questions of law and fact that the court had jurisdiction to review.…

Last week saw a possible variation on the Fifth Circuit’s finality trap: the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed some of its claims before the district court dismissed the remainder. Thankfully the Fifth Circuit saw no effort to manufacture an appeal and concluded that the district court’s dismissal was appealable.

In other decisions, the Eighth Circuit reviewed a remand under CAFA’s local-controversy exception.…

Last week saw several decisions tackling difficult appellate-jurisdiction issues. Primary among them was the Seventh Circuit’s decision recognizing the messiness in its decisions reviewing extensions of the appeal deadline for excusable neglect. That court treats the excusable-neglect requirement as jurisdictional, but it reviews these excusable-neglect determinations only for an abuse of discretion.…

Extensive post-judgment proceedings sometimes follow litigation. These proceedings might involve efforts to collect on a judgment. Or they might involve a district court’s supervision of a consent decree or remedial injunction. These post-judgment proceedings are considered a separate action for finality purposes. So litigants have a right to appeal from a final decision.…

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5) permits district courts to extend the appeal deadline upon a showing of good cause or excusable neglect. The Seventh Circuit has held that this good-cause/excusable-neglect requirement is jurisdictional. That means the court of appeals must police the good-cause/excusable-neglect requirement on its own initiative, even if the parties do not dispute it.…

Last week, the Seventh Circuit explained the circumstances under which litigants can appeal from Colorado River stays: issues need not be identical, nor must the state court proceedings resolve all of the federal action. The Eleventh Circuit held that it could review a denial of asylum even though an immigration petitioner had been granted withholding of removal.…

I’m on vacation this week, which means a truncated weekly roundup.…

Last week, the Federal Circuit might have kicked off another game of jurisdictional hot potato with the Fifth Circuit. Those courts can’t agree on where Walker Process appeals belong, and the Federal Circuit just sent another to the Fifth. The Sixth Circuit declined to weigh in on whether district courts must stay (and not dismiss) actions after ordering arbitration.…