Charles Dexter Colvin Tamara Colvin, Individually and as Husband and Wife v. Maryland Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation

779 F.2d 50, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13928, 1985 WL 12796
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedOctober 31, 1985
Docket85-1613
StatusUnpublished

This text of 779 F.2d 50 (Charles Dexter Colvin Tamara Colvin, Individually and as Husband and Wife v. Maryland Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Charles Dexter Colvin Tamara Colvin, Individually and as Husband and Wife v. Maryland Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation, 779 F.2d 50, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13928, 1985 WL 12796 (6th Cir. 1985).

Opinion

779 F.2d 50

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
CHARLES DEXTER COLVIN; TAMARA COLVIN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
HUSBAND AND WIFE, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
MARYLAND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.

85-1613

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

10/31/85

APPEAL DISMISSED

E.D.Mich.

ORDER

BEFORE: KEITH, KENNEDY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the Court on the motion of the appellee Maryland Casualty Insurance Company to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The appellants have responded in opposition thereto.

The appellants Charles Dexter Colvin and Tamara Colvin are appealing the district court order dated July 2, 1985, granting in part and denying in part the defendant-appellee's motion for partial summary judgment. The appellants filed a notice of appeal with the district court on July 18, 1985.

The order from which the appeal was taken is a nonappealable interlocutory order. Fewer than all parties were dismissed from the action and the district court did not certify that an appeal could be taken. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). The right of appeal may be exercised only when final judgment disposing of the cause in its entirety has been rendered. Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945).

For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed as being prosecuted from a nonappealable interlocutory order.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Catlin v. United States
324 U.S. 229 (Supreme Court, 1945)
Gray v. Attorney General for State of Tenn
779 F.2d 50 (Sixth Circuit, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
779 F.2d 50, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 13928, 1985 WL 12796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-dexter-colvin-tamara-colvin-individually-a-ca6-1985.