The Tenth Circuit rightly rejected pendent appellate jurisdiction over a Monell claim as part of a qualified-immunity appeal. But the courts of appeals’ willingness to entertain attempts at interlocutory appeals of Monell claims remains troubling.
May 3, 2019
A recent decision out of the Tenth Circuit—Estate of Ceballos v. Husk—illustrates the one of the several persistent problems with interlocutory qualified-immunity appeals. In Ceballos, the Tenth Circuit rightly refused to extend pendent appellate jurisdiction over a city’s appeal from the denial of its motion to dismiss a civil right claims for municipal liability (more commonly known as a “Monell claim). But the court did not disclaim the practice of extending pendent jurisdiction over these appeals; it simply held that doing so was inappropriate in that case. Ceballos (like many other cases in which this issue arises) was a missed opportunity to squarely refuse to entertain these attempts at using pendent appellate jurisdiction. These attempts not only are doctrinally unsound, but they also impose costs on courts and litigants (in the form of wasted time and effort) with no offsetting benefits.