Michael C. Thompson v. Nickolas Dereta, Robert Swehla, James Gober and John Does 1 Through 6

709 F.2d 1343, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 28706
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided April 20, 1983·No. 82-2369·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ORDER AND JUDGMENT

In accordance with 10th Cir.R. 9(e) and Fed.R.App.P. 34(a), this appeal came on for consideration on the briefs and record on appeal.

This is an appeal from an order dismissing plaintiffs complaint, but with leave to amend. The record indicates that plaintiffs amended complaint is still pending.

It is well settled that dismissal of a complaint is not an appealable order unless, in a practical sense, the district court, 549 F.Supp. 297, dismisses the action as well. Petty v. Manpower, Inc., 591 F.2d 615 (10th Cir.1979). In this case, we conclude that the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. There is no indication that the plaintiff will be precluded from taking a proper appeal, if necessary, after the district court enters a final dispositive order. See 10th Cir.R. 17(b).

The appeal is DISMISSED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

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

Michael C. Thompson v. Nickolas Dereta, Robert Swehla, James Gober and John Does 1 Through 6, 709 F.2d 1343, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 28706 (10th Cir. 1983).

709 F.2d 1343 (Michael C. Thompson v. Nickolas Dereta, Robert Swehla, James Gober and John Does 1 Through 6) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moya v. Schollenbarger
465 F.3d 444 (Tenth Circuit, 2006)
Murray v. Archambo
132 F.3d 609 (Tenth Circuit, 1998)
Landmark Land Co. of Oklahoma, Inc. v. Buchanan
874 F.2d 717 (Tenth Circuit, 1989)
Landmark Land Company Of Oklahoma, Inc. v. Buchanan
874 F.2d 717 (Tenth Circuit, 1989)
Gilbert Equipment Co., Inc. v. Higgins
709 F. Supp. 1071 (S.D. Alabama, 1989)