8 Final Judgment & Appeals Flashcards
Question 5014 (MBE Exam #3 PM)
In a case properly brought in federal district court, the plaintiff alleges that the state police, acting under a longstanding custom of using excessive force in traffic stops, beat him up during a routine traffic stop. The plaintiff requests $100,000 in damages to remedy this injury and, fearing that the state police are targeting him, also requests preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the police from using excessive force against him. The court issues an order refusing to grant the plaintiff a preliminary injunction and setting the case for trial. Three weeks later, the plaintiff appeals this order to the appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals.
Can the appellate court hear this appeal?
A. Yes, if the appellate court, in the exercise of its discretion, concludes that an appeal is warranted.
B. Yes, as a matter of right.
C. No, because the district court’s order is not a final judgment.
D. No, because the appeal was not filed in a timely manner.
B. Yes, as a matter of right.
Answer choice B is correct. Although most non-final (interlocutory) orders cannot be appealed, orders concerning injunctions are appealable immediately as of right.
Answer choice A is incorrect because such an appeal is the plaintiff’s right, not a matter of the appellate court’s discretion.
Answer choice C is incorrect because, even though non-final judgments ordinarily cannot be appealed, injunctive orders are an exception.
Answer choice D is incorrect because the appeal was filed within the 30-day time limit for taking an appeal.
POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE - Appeals
Question 6447 (MBE Exam #3 PM)
The holder of a trademark sued an entrepreneur in federal court for damages resulting from the breach of an agreement that granted the entrepreneur exclusive use of a trademark in a specified geographic area. Although the weight of the evidence regarding the breach was clearly against the entrepreneur, there was substantial evidence to support the entrepreneur’s position. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the entrepreneur and the trial court entered a judgment accordingly. On appeal, the trademark holder sought to have the judgment set aside because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
How should the appellate court rule?
A. Set aside the judgment, because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
B. Set aside the judgment, because the issue was one that should have been decided by the court.
C. Affirm the judgment, because there was substantial evidence to support the verdict.
D. Affirm the judgment, because the appellate court is precluded from setting aside a jury verdict by the Seventh Amendment.
C. Affirm the judgment, because there was substantial evidence to support the verdict.
Answer choice C is correct. In determining whether to set aside a jury verdict, it is not sufficient that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Some appellate courts refuse to set aside a jury verdict if there is substantial evidence supporting the verdict. Other courts require only sufficient evidence to sustain a jury verdict. Still others uphold a jury verdict unless there is no evidence to support the verdict. Because there was substantial evidence to support the verdict in this case, the judgment should be affirmed regardless of the requisite level of evidence necessary to support the verdict in the applicable jurisdiction.
Answer choice A is incorrect. Although a jury verdict is against the weight of the evidence, the judgment entered is in accord with that verdict must generally be upheld if there substantial evidence to support the verdict, as in this case.
Answer choice B is incorrect because there is a right to a jury trial with regard to an action at law. An action for damages resulting from the breach of an agreement is an action at law. Therefore, this was a proper issue for jury determination.
Answer choice D is incorrect. Although the Seventh Amendment preserves the right to a jury trial in a civil matter brought in federal court, this amendment does not prevent a court from setting aside a jury verdict when the verdict is not supported by sufficient evidence.
POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE - Appeals
54
Three employees sued their employer in federal court for failing to pay overtime wages, in violation of both federal and state law. The employer moved for summary judgment on the federal-law claims but not on the state-law claims, which closely paralleled the federal-law claims. The court granted the employer’s motion.
The employees have moved in the district court for an order certifying an immediate appeal of the grant of summary judgment on the federal-law claims because there is no just reason for delay.
Is the court likely to grant the motion?
A No, because the employee should have filed their certification motion in the court of appeals.
B No, because the federal law claims are not separate and distinct from the state law claims.
C Yes, because denying an immediate appeal may prejudice the employees by delaying their recovery.
D. Yes, because employees are entitled to immediate review of the grant of summary judgment on the federal-law claims
B No, because the federal law claims are not separate and distinct from the state law claims.
A party may appeal after the district court has entered a final judgment unless a limited exception applies. For example, when an action involves multiple claims or parties, a district court may enter final judgment as to fewer than all claims or parties and certify the judgment for immediate appeal if it expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay. For no just reason for delay to exist, courts generally require that the adjudicated and unadjudicated claims be separate and distinct.
Here, the employees sued their employer in federal district court for violating federal and state wage laws. The court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment on the federal-law claims, but the state-law claims remain. The state-law and federal-law claims are closely parallel, so the federal-law claims are not separate and distinct from the state-law claims. This means that the court is unlikely to find that there is no just reason for delay. Therefore, the court will likely deny the employees’ motion for an order certifying an immediate appeal.
(Choice A) The employees properly filed their certification motion in the district court because the district court—not the appellate court—is authorized to enter final judgment and certify claims for immediate appeal.*
*An appellate court can review a district court’s entry of the final judgment and remand the case if it determines that the district court abused its discretion in determining that there was no just reason for delay.
(Choice C) Waiting until a final judgment on the entire action is entered will always delay plaintiffs’ recovery. If this factor controlled, every claim determined in a multiple-claim action before a final judgment was reached in the entire action would be immediately appealable. This would effectively eliminate the final-judgment rule in these actions.
(Choice D) The employees are not entitled to immediate review of the grant of summary judgment on the federal-law claims because the court is unlikely to determine that there is no justifiable reason for delay.
Educational objective:
When an action involves multiple claims or parties, a district court may enter final judgment as to fewer than all claims or parties and certify the judgment for immediate appeal if it expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay. This generally requires that the adjudicated and unadjudicated claims be separate and distinct.
References
• 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (setting forth the final-judgment rule).
• Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (explaining when a district court may enter final judgment for multiple claims or parties).
• 10 Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 2659 (4th ed. 2021) (explaining that a district court may find that no just reason to delay an immediate appeal exists when the claims are separate and distinct).
