Oak Construction Company v. Huron Cement Company

475 F.2d 1220, 17 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 185, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10963
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided March 22, 1973·No. 72-1853·Published·Cited by 113 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant cement company in a Robinson-Patman action, 15 U.S.C. § 13(a), (d), and (e), to recover treble damages for injuries resulting from unlawful price discrimination.

The record reveals that a counterclaim for non-payment of a contract debt was filed by defendant but has not yet been adjudicated. Since all the claims before the court were not decided in the grant of summary judgment, that order is interlocutory. Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Brunsing, 378 F.2d 234 (9th Cir. 1967); 6 J. Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 54.35[1], at 582 (2d ed. 1948).

Federal courts of appeal do not have jurisdiction of interlocutory orders under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, David v. District of Columbia, 88 U.S.App.D.C. 92, 187 F.2d 204 (D.C.Cir.1950), although in an action involving multiple claims or parties the district court may enter a final, appealable judgment with respect to less than all the claims or parties if it certifies that there is no just reason for delay and expressly directs the entry of judgment. Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). No such certification or direction was entered in this case. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.

This lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured now by a belated Rule 54(b) certification by the District Court. Williams v. Bernhardt Bros. Tugboat Service, Inc., 357 F.2d 883 (7th Cir. 1966). Our jurisdiction attaches, if at all, when notice of appeal is filed in the district court. See Fed.R.App.P. 3(a). If all the jurisdictional prerequisites have not been satisfied at that point, we have no choice but to dismiss the action and “indicate to the parties that if the trial court enters a new judgment and accompanies it with a Rule 54(b) certificate, the second appeal will be heard on the record and briefs prepared for the first appeal, as supplemented by the new judgment and certificate.” 3 Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1193, at 26 (Wright ed. 1958).

The appeal is dismissed. No costs.

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

Oak Construction Company v. Huron Cement Company, 475 F.2d 1220, 17 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 185, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 10963 (6th Cir. 1973).

475 F.2d 1220 (Oak Construction Company v. Huron Cement Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

LTV Steel Co. v. United Mine Workers
922 F.2d 86 (Second Circuit, 1990)
Hancock v. Dodson
918 F.2d 957 (Sixth Circuit, 1990)
Agristor Leasing v. Mohr
902 F.2d 32 (Sixth Circuit, 1990)
U.S. Auto Finance Co. v. Union Federal Sav. & Loan
889 F.2d 1089 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)
Morris May v. William O. Bertelsman, Judge
889 F.2d 1088 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)
Morris May v. Warner Amex Cable Communications
889 F.2d 1088 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)
John Cooper v. United States
875 F.2d 862 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)
Malahof v. Stiver
848 F.2d 192 (Sixth Circuit, 1988)
Lucas v. Bowen
843 F.2d 1391 (Sixth Circuit, 1988)
White by Swafford v. City of Chattanooga
843 F.2d 1393 (Sixth Circuit, 1988)
Atec, Inc. v. Frank v. Carlow
843 F.2d 1390 (Sixth Circuit, 1988)
Charles R. Crable v. Ohio Bell Telephone Co.
842 F.2d 330 (Sixth Circuit, 1988)