Davis v. Hanover Insurance

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


____________________


No. 96-1650



                                     FRED DAVIS,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                     HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, JOHN F. O'BRIEN,

                 CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY,



                                Defendants, Appellees.


____________________



                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



                       [Hon. Mark L. Wolf, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________



                                 ____________________



            Fred Davis on brief pro se.
            __________

            George R. Suslak and Stanton & Lang on brief for appellees.
            ________________     ______________


____________________



                                   OCTOBER 11, 1996

                                 ____________________



Per  Curiam.  As the  record indicates, at  the time the
                 ___________



            instant  case was filed in federal district court no judgment



            had  yet  entered  in  state court  on  the  counterclaim  of



            defendants/appellees.    Since   all  claims  had   not  been



            adjudicated, plaintiff/appellant had no right at that time to



            appeal  the  judgment  dismissing  his action.    See  Litton
                                                              ___  ______



            Business Telephone  Systems, Inc.  v. Schwartz, 9  Mass. App.
            ________________________________      ________



            Ct. 865, 865, 400 N.E.2d  281, 281 (1979) (dismissing  appeal



            "because the judgment entered .  . . does not dispose of  the



            counterclaim").  Consequently, he suffered no injury from the



            alleged failure of the state court to assemble his record for



            appeal.



                 Affirmed.
                 ________


-2-