Eleventh Circuit: No Contempt Appeals Without a Sanction
In In re Grand Jury Subpoena, the Eleventh Circuit explained that it could not review a contempt decision without a sanction.
The case involved subpoenas directed to three businesses. The document custodian for those businesses unsuccessfully moved to quash the subpoenas. The custodian then refused to comply with the subpoenas. The district court accordingly held the custodian in contempt. But the district court stayed any decision on sanctions until after the custodian could appeal.
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal for a lack of jurisdiction. To be sure, an order of contempt is often immediately appealable as a final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. But to be final, a non-contingent sanction must accompany the contempt. Otherwise, the contempt is akin to a determination of liability but not damages. And a determination of liability is not final until damages are set.
The Eleventh Circuit added that the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Ryan was not to the contrary. Taken out of context, Ryan could be read to suggest that only a contempt citation is necessary to appeal. But Ryan didn’t involve a contempt appeal, nor did it have any reason to consider the appealability of a sanction-less contempt. It accordingly cannot be read to allow for contempt appeals without a sanction. In so reading Ryan, the Eleventh Circuit split with the Second Circuit.
The Eleventh Circuit ended by noting that district courts are free to impose a sanction but then immediately stay its execution pending an appeal.
In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 2023 WL 1232830 (11th Cir. Jan. 31, 2023), available at the Eleventh 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
A ruling on liability is not final until the court specifies a remedy. But what if that remedy consists entirely of attorney fees? The Supreme Court has long held that a decision on the merits is final despite any unresolved issues regarding attorney fees. So is a ruling on liability final when the remedy is […]
Continue reading....Recent Posts
Perlman Appeals in the Grand Jury Context In In re Grand Jury Subpoeans Dated Sep. 13, 2023, the Second Circuit held that the target of a grand jury investigation could appeal an order directing the target’s attorneys to disclose documents over a claim of attorney-client privilege. The order was appealable via the Perlman doctrine, which generally […]
Continue reading....
In Fleming v. United States, the Eleventh Circuit became the fifth court of appeals to reject pure Bivens appeals. The court held that federal officials cannot immediately appeal the Bivens question without also appealing the denial of qualified immunity. Unlike some of the prior decisions, this one was unanimous. And it puts the government’s record […]
Continue reading....
Last month produced decisions involving a variety of appellate-jurisdiction issues. The Fifth Circuit decertified a § 1292(b) appeal. Judge Pillard of the D.C. Circuit explained that appellate “standing” does not require re-establishing standing in the court of appeals. The Sixth Circuit said that qualified immunity and an action’s merits are intertwined, which suggests (perhaps unintentionally) […]
Continue reading....
A new cert petition asks whether the denial of derivative sovereign immunity is immediately appealable via the collateral-order doctrine.
Continue reading....
Disclosure: I filed an amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit in support of rehearing its decision in this case and discussed the cert petition with the petitioner’s counsel. Last week, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Parrish v. United States. The case asks if a would-be appellant must file a second notice of appeal after […]
Continue reading....