John McManus v. Essex Insurance Co.

Eighth Circuit

John McManus v. Essex Insurance Co.

110 F. App'x 741

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedOctober 15, 2004

Docket03-3398

StatusUnpublished

This text of 110 F. App'x 741 (John McManus v. Essex Insurance Co.) 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.

Bluebook

John McManus v. Essex Insurance Co., 110 F. App'x 741 (8th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

John McManus (McManus) appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on its claim filed in an interpleader action brought by Essex Insurance Company. He also has filed motions requesting to continue his cross-claims against Adjusters Incorporated for the People (Adjusters) and the IRS, and to supplement the record on appeal.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, because at the time the district court granted summary judgment, the cross-claims were pending and the district court did not rule on them. Thus there was no final judgment from which to take an appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (appellate jurisdiction over final orders); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b) (“order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties”); Miller v. Special Weapons, L.L.C., 369 F.3d 1033, 1034-35 (8th Cir.2004); Thomas v. Basham, 931 F.2d 521, 522-24 (8th Cir.1991) (appellate courts have obligation to raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte “when there is an indication that jurisdiction is lacking”). Given this disposition, we need not rule on McManus’s pending motions.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

1

. The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

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

PER CURIAM.

John McManus (McManus) appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on its claim filed in an interpleader action brought by Essex Insurance Company. He also has filed motions requesting to continue his cross-claims against Adjusters Incorporated for the People (Adjusters) and the IRS, and to supplement the record on appeal.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, because at the time the district court granted summary judgment, the cross-claims were pending and the district court did not rule on them. Thus there was no final judgment from which to take an appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (appellate jurisdiction over final orders); Fed. R.Civ.P. 54(b) (“order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims or parties”); Miller v. Special Weapons, L.L.C., 369 F.3d 1033, 1034-35 (8th Cir.2004); Thomas v. Basham, 931 F.2d 521, 522-24 (8th Cir.1991) (appellate courts have obligation to raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte “when there is an indication that jurisdiction is lacking”). Given this disposition, we need not rule on McManus’s pending motions.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.

1

. The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 F. App'x 741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-mcmanus-v-essex-insurance-co-ca8-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack