28 USC 1291 Courts of appeals (less federal circuit appeals) has jurisdiction of appeals from FINAL

DECISIONS of the district courts of the US, certain territories, EXCEPT where a direct
review may be had in the Supreme Court. USCAFC (top part) jurisdiction limited to
1292 (c)(d) and 1295
54(b) action presents more than one claim for relief (claim, counterC, crossC, 3rd party), or
mutiple parties invovled, court may direct final judgment to one or more, fewer then all,
IFF court expressly determines there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, can be
revised until ENTRY OF JUDGMENT adjudicating all claims/parties rights and
liabilities
28 USC 1292 - long rule
a. court of appeals has jurisdiction from
1. interlocutory orders of USDC granting continuing, modifying refusing or
dissolving injunctions, or refusing to dissolve or modigy inunctions, except where direct
review may be had in Supreme Court
2. Interlocutory orders appointing receivers, or refusing orders to wind up
receiverships or to take steps to accomppish the purposes thereof,a such as directing
sales or other disposals of property
b. (uncommon) requires "controlling question of law as to which there is susbstantial
groudn for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may
meterially advance the utimate terminationn of the ligiation. - doest not stay
proceedings in district court unless expressly ordered
final decision - fully treated
Dilly v. S.S. Kresge (1979)
Facts:
Dilly claims injury to her neck from being yelled at by Kresge. Dilly brings suit. Both
parties file cross-motions for summary judgment. District court granted summary
judgment for plaintiffs. Kresge motioned to set aside order. Motion denied. Notice of
appeal then filed and taken to order granting summary judgment for plaintiffs.
Defendant claims appeals is from final order.
Issue:

Whether summary judgment before ascertainment of damages is a final order

appealable within the context of 28 USC 1291.
Rule:
A final decision generally is one which ends the litigation on the merits and leaves
nothing for the cour to do but execute the judgment. - Catlin v US (1945)
Holding:
There is still a decision to be made as to whether there are damages, and what amount
those damages will acccure. Therefore, not a final decision.
Disposition: Appeals Dismissed
Reason and Policy:
More to be decided by court, so not appealable. Also, not interlocutory appealed
presented. Without either of these pieces, appeals court has no jurisdiction (but can
dismiss? odd)
purpose of finality rules is efficiency? partly at least,wihtout proceedings may be
lengthened
errors to eb corrected where? trial or appeals courts
Trial court. give judge opportunity to correct an error.
Motion to strike, exclude. also opposing counsel can object
after judgment is entered, two 28 day motions - RMJL and New Trial. all trial court
remedies
final decision rule supports these procedures (finality rule)
in USDC judgment is entered, Hunts unhapppy, wants appeal, appeals to court of
appeals. new trial may or may not need to be requested first (LU). next appeal
USSC (writ and something else) appeals are not heard as a matter of right, but
discretion
Review of appeals court at USSC

28 USC 2071 - Rule Making Power

Allows Appeals court to make rules about appeals, but they still must be consistent with
current rules for federal appeals
28 USC 2106 - Determination
The SC or any other court of appellate jurisdiction may affirm, modify, vacate, set aside
or reverse any judgment, decree, or order of a court lawully brought before it for review,
adn mayremand and director require further proceedings SO LONG as its in the name of
justice (just due to circumstances...thats vague)
64 - stays of enforcement and proceedings and stuff and 62
1254 - SC review
write of certiorari (matter of discretion)
requires 1. questions presented for review, 2. a concise statement of the case, 3.
and an argument regarding the reasons for allowance of the writ.
Article 6 of Cali Const.
1257 - state courts; certiorari
federal law issues can be sent to USSC regardless of state appeals court
failure of highest ocurt to hear a case will not block cert to USSC
different states have different jurisdictional rules
Hunts just lost judgment for $1,000,000. Wants to appeal.
Does he have to worry about execution on his property? has 14 days (62)
Appeal upon placing a bond (superseadeous 62)
APP RULES 4a
must file notice of appeal within 30, with the district clerk
how do documents travel to appeals court? (LU)
1530-1579
by certification by court of appeals (once per decade)
Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. (1949)
Facts:
District court denied corporate defendant's motion to require security under the state
statute. The court of appeals entertained an appeal and reversed. The case reached the
Supreme Court on certiorari.

Issue:
Whether the a motion to require secutiry is appealable.
Rule:
USC 1291, 1292
Holding:
order appealable because it is a final disposition of a claimed right which is not an
ingredient of the cause of action and does not require consideration with it.
Disposition:
Affirmed the appeal.
Reasoning and Policy:
The right to security is seperate that of the other merits of the case and would be lost
and has the propensity for irreperable harm if not subject to appeal prior to a final order.
Collateral order doctrine is a practical construction of the final decision rule (1544)
Conclusive, important question, seperate from the merits, rendered unreviewable
finality used little because few close cases
Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp
Facts:
Gillespie brings multiple claims against United Sates Steel Corp and multiple parties
including her two children. District Judge strikes complaint dealing with Ohio statutes
or to unseaworthiness and to recovery for the children. Gillespie appeals. USSC certs to
SC.
Issue:
Are the complaints by Gillespie regarding parties that can recover and portions of the
complaint available for appeal due to being struck?
Rule:
1291 - appeal may be taken from any final order of a district court. does not necessarily
have to be the last order possible
Holding:

the issues are appealable because to not allow for there appeal would significantly
impact the case, the ability for the parties to recover
Policy and Reasoning:Appealability for decisions that will cause problems in efficiency,
ability to acquire damages by parties, cause unecessary burdens.
54a - imediate dismissal of appeal if
1) no final disposition of some but fewer than all ofhte claims or parties
2) only a single claimf or relief with tow or more variants was invovled
3) if the trial court abused its discretion under the Rule
Why Have Appeals?
G: bahhumbug - no need. lose and get over it
at the micro level why and on the macro level why
C: Checks and balances - keep lower courts in check. supervisory system
Federal Judges serve life unless impeached
need supervision because...it prevents judges from abusing discretion,makes evident
when discretion is abused, and power in general
Congress passes statutes, judicial review upholds seperation of powers (will of congress
adhered to)
allows for uniformity
if no uniformity, people cannnot conform to the law
allows businesses and people alike to plan
uniformity is part of equality clause of constitution and .... due process.
appelate review allows for due process (just one avenue)
how are appeals not a violation of the 7th amendment? (violation of jury decision)
No, because facts are not reviewed, but rather the questions of law.
Motion for a new trial - verdict against weight of the evidence (still a legal standard)
50a motion. judge denies motion
Huntsberger upset, certain judge is incorrect.
Can huntsberger appeal the decision at the end of pleading his case after 50a is denied?
judges decision at this point is an interlocutory decision. (non final decision)
54b -

trial judge acts as a dispatching agent: the trial judge can refuse to allow an appeal or,
withi specified guidelines, can decide to allow an appeal. reliant on discretion of
dispatcher, not receiver
Carson v. American Brands, Inc. (1981) Sup. Crt.
Facts:
Workers want affirmative action put in place. American Brands agrees with a few
stipulations that make the company look better. Judge denies motion
Issue:
Whether an interlocutory order denying a joint motion of the parties for injunctive relief
is an appealable order.
Rule:
For interlocutory order ot be appealable under 1292(a)(1) order must have the practical
effect of refusing an injunction.
Still against piecemeal review.
Interlocutory appeal only to be used when benefites efficiency, prevents irreperable
harm. "serious, perhaps irreparable, consequence" - prerequ for appeal under 1292a1

Holding:
Refusing to approve negotiated consent decree denies petitioners the compromise and
obtaining injunctive relief. Since the order refuses an injunction (consider likelihood of
injunction success), then immediately appealable.
expands the meaning of injunction
Disposition:
reversed the denial of the consent decree
Policy and Reasoning:

If a trial ensues after arbitration has been denied, then the results reached in arbitration
are unlikely to be upheld and useful after the trial

North Supply Co. v. Greater Development & Services Corp. (1984)

remember its a practicality issue
arbitration - method of disute resolution typically agreed to in which the decision is
binding (classic)
difference between arbitration and mediation? (arbiter makes a decision)
mediation - nonbinding, helps the others make a decision
Is the denial of a motion to stay arbitration a final decision? -> why is this not a
collateral order
arbitration does not create an enforceable decision prior to a judge reviewing the
arbiters decision
stays of arbitration are injunctions, whereas denials of stays of arbitration are not
necessarily injunctions
consider things interal to the court and external
injunctions are external to the court
Issue:
Can a refusal by a court to stay arbitration be appealed?
Holding:
No. However, granting a stay of arbitration can be appealed because it is an injunction
that can have irreperable harm, where as the other is more fo an incovenience.
This is not the rule for every district.(or is it? 1988 9USC % 16) how does that apply?
Saudi Basic Industries corp. v. exxon corp (2004)
prevention of the use of trademarks until litigation can be considered injunction
Practicality more important than 'literal chracterizatio'

injunctive order is one that 1) directs a party 2) under penalty of contempt 3) designed
to accord or protect"some or all of the substantive relief sought by a complaint"
unlike denials, grants of injunction have the penalty of contempt
Fred Weber v. Shell Oil Co (1977)
disqualifying counsel not consideration for appeal of injunction

Kraus v. Board of County Road Commissioners (1966)

extra service of process requirement for the government makes it easier for the
government to defend cases
material advancement considers expediency of trial
unhappy about a courts decision to grant my motion for summary judgment - can i take
a writ of mandamus? no, because mandamus is not a substitute for appeal.
writ of mandamus useable when a judge exceeds his discretion, usurpation of judicial
power
error vs. usurpation of power
only used in exceptional circumstances
confines an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction
1651 - all writs statute
somehow aids jurisdiction of appeals court
writ of mandamus aids in preserving jurisdiction of appeals court
to use writ of mandamus, appeals court must have jurisdiction
therefore, mandamus is not a subsitute for an appeal.
Facts:
Kraus brings suit for wrongful death of intestate. State moves for summary judgment.
Judge denials but submits for appeal.

Issue:
Whether this interlocutory decision that would increase the trial time from a week to
mutiple months is appealable.
Holding:
No. no no no. It is completely inefficient, will force the claim to last much longer then it
otherwise would. Does not benefite the court and really only has the opportunity to
benefite the Board of County Road Commissioners.
Disposition:
Application for leave to appeal is denied.
Reason and Policy:
Efficiency should be considered when filing for appeal of interlocutory deicsion. That,
and the irreperable harm. Neither is evident in this case.
Mandamus
Schlagenhauf v. Holder (1964) Sup. Crt.
Defendant forced into exam as opposed to Sibach who was the plaintiff
mandamus allowed because there is no good cause
also allowed because its a case of first impression

whats a writ of prohibition?

54b when multiple claims at stake