Knox v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters

Fifth Circuit

Knox v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters

520 F.2d 1205, 20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1362, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 12410, 10 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,439, 11 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1330

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedOctober 10, 1975

DocketNo. 75-2440

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 520 F.2d 1205 (Knox v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Knox v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters, 520 F.2d 1205, 20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1362, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 12410, 10 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,439, 11 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1330 (5th Cir. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken by the plaintiff, Leno Knox, from an order of the district court granting class action status to his action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (1970) but defining the class much more narrowly than requested.

An order granting class action status is not ordinarily appealable as a final order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Compare Katz v. Carte Blanche Corporation, 496 F.2d 747, 752 (3d Cir. 1974) cert. denied, 419 U.S. 885, 95 S.Ct. 152, 42 L.Ed.2d 125 (1974) with Herbst v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 495 F.2d 1308 (2d Cir. 1974). There may be situations in which the “grant” of a right to proceed as a class is so narrowed as to amount to a substantial denial of the right to so proceed, thus making the “death knell” test appropriate. This is not urged to be such a case. If the instant order is appealable it must be qualified under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Accordingly, this cause is remanded to the district court for a decision by the district judge whether to make the findings and conclusions required by that statute. See Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 417 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir. 1969). If no such determinations are made, this court would lack jurisdiction of the appeal. Of course, we intimate no view either way on any of the factors involved in such determinations.

Remanded with directions.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken by the plaintiff, Leno Knox, from an order of the district court granting class action status to his action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (1970) but defining the class much more narrowly than requested.

An order granting class action status is not ordinarily appealable as a final order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Compare Katz v. Carte Blanche Corporation, 496 F.2d 747, 752 (3d Cir. 1974) cert. denied, 419 U.S. 885, 95 S.Ct. 152, 42 L.Ed.2d 125 (1974) with Herbst v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 495 F.2d 1308 (2d Cir. 1974). There may be situations in which the “grant” of a right to proceed as a class is so narrowed as to amount to a substantial denial of the right to so proceed, thus making the “death knell” test appropriate. This is not urged to be such a case. If the instant order is appealable it must be qualified under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Accordingly, this cause is remanded to the district court for a decision by the district judge whether to make the findings and conclusions required by that statute. See Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 417 F.2d 1122 (5th Cir. 1969). If no such determinations are made, this court would lack jurisdiction of the appeal. Of course, we intimate no view either way on any of the factors involved in such determinations.

Remanded with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

520 F.2d 1205, 20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1362, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 12410, 10 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,439, 11 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/knox-v-amalgamated-meat-cutters-ca5-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack