Inez Hunter v. Barry Johnson
This text of 331 F. App'x 426 (Inez Hunter v. Barry Johnson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In this civil action, Inez Hunter appeals following the district court’s 1 dismissal of one defendant, and the court’s denial of Hunter’s motion for default judgment as to another defendant. When Hunter filed the instant notice of appeal on July 2, 2008, the magistrate judge’s report of June 27, 2008 — recommending explicitly dismissing Woodbury Community Land Trust and closing the case — had not yet been acted upon by the district court, and thus Hunter was on notice that her appeal was premature. She did not file another notice of appeal or amend the instant notice of appeal following the district court’s adoption of the magistrate judge’s report over her objections, and the subsequent entry of final judgment on August 5, 2008. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Huggins v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 566 F.3d 771, 773 (8th Cir.2009) (appellate courts are obligated to consider sua sponte jurisdictional issues where it appears jurisdiction is lacking); Thomas v. Basham, 931 F.2d 521, 523 (8th Cir.1991) (appeal was premature when some claims remained pending).
. The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
331 F. App'x 426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inez-hunter-v-barry-johnson-ca8-2009.