Litigation in Federal Court
Appeals
The Finality Rule
28 U.S.C. §1291 – Final Decisions of District Courts (Subject Matter Jurisdiction for Appeals)
The courts of appeals shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States.
FRCP 58 — Default Rule: without a final order, appellate courts will approach an appeal of the case with a high level of skepticism.
Exceptions
The Collateral Rule Doctrine: issues may be reviewed before obtaining a final judgment if they are:
[a] Separate: not related to the merits of the case.
[b] Final: the issue can be fully resolved on appeal, often graduates to §1292.
[c] Urgent: most often involve irreparable harm.
[d] Important: discretionary judgement of the court; mini certiorari.
28 U.S.C. §1292: Specifically authorized interlocutory appeals.
(a) – Injunctions, receivers, admiralty
(b) – Defendant certified issues that the Court of Appeals accepts for review.
FRCP 54(b): Judgment on Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Parties.
“When an action presents more than one claim for relief... the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, any order or other decision, however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties’ rights and liabilities.”
o Provided at the discretion of the district court judge when they grant an appealable order to the party wishing to appeal.
o Spot final judgment for specific claims or parties; “Spot Golden Ticket”
Mandamus: The Most Extraordinary Exception
Origins: 28 U.S.C. §1651(a) - All Writs Act
(a) The Supreme Court and all [lower federal courts] may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.
Mandamus Test: Writ-based review of non-final orders
[1] Special risk of irreparable harm [special + irreparable]
There must be “no other adequate means of relief”; something about the order must make an end-of-case appeal “ineffectual or leave legitimate interests unduly at risk.”
[2] Clear entitlement to relief
Main Circumstance: Jurisdiction; The court must be “clearly without jurisdiction” or have exceeded its discretion “to such a degree that its actions amounted to a ‘usurpation of power.’”