Robert P. Miller v. Kenneth Reighter

Eighth Circuit

Robert P. Miller v. Kenneth Reighter

581 F.2d 1181, 26 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 131, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8905

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 20, 1978

Docket78-1276

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 581 F.2d 1181 (Robert P. Miller v. Kenneth Reighter) 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

Robert P. Miller v. Kenneth Reighter, 581 F.2d 1181, 26 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 131, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8905 (8th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robért P. Miller brought a class action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Dr. Kenneth Reighter and others seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in respect to psychiatric care at the Penitentiary Unit of the Nebraska State Penal and Correction Complex. Reighter is presently seeking review, of an order entered on February 7, 1978 in which the District Court allowed Miller’s attorneys and experts to examine certain medical and psychiatric records maintained by Reighter. Reighter argues that these records are privileged,

Miller argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction to review this order. Reighter argues, however, that this was a final order because it is a final disposition of a claimed *1182 right which is not an ingredient of the cause of action and does not require consideration with it. See Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). We disagree. Ordinarily, a discovery order directed to the production of documents, and which imposes no sanctions, is not a final order appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Gialde v. Time, Inc., 480 F.2d 1295, 1300 (8th Cir. 1973). Denial of immediate review of the District Court’s discovery order would not render meaningful review at a subsequent time impossible. See United States v. Ryan, 402 U.S. 530, 533, 91 S.Ct. 1580, 29 L.Ed.2d 85 (1971). Thus, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

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

PER CURIAM.

Robért P. Miller brought a class action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Dr. Kenneth Reighter and others seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in respect to psychiatric care at the Penitentiary Unit of the Nebraska State Penal and Correction Complex. Reighter is presently seeking review, of an order entered on February 7, 1978 in which the District Court allowed Miller’s attorneys and experts to examine certain medical and psychiatric records maintained by Reighter. Reighter argues that these records are privileged,

Miller argues that this Court lacks jurisdiction to review this order. Reighter argues, however, that this was a final order because it is a final disposition of a claimed *1182 right which is not an ingredient of the cause of action and does not require consideration with it. See Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). We disagree. Ordinarily, a discovery order directed to the production of documents, and which imposes no sanctions, is not a final order appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Gialde v. Time, Inc., 480 F.2d 1295, 1300 (8th Cir. 1973). Denial of immediate review of the District Court’s discovery order would not render meaningful review at a subsequent time impossible. See United States v. Ryan, 402 U.S. 530, 533, 91 S.Ct. 1580, 29 L.Ed.2d 85 (1971). Thus, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 F.2d 1181, 26 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 131, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-p-miller-v-kenneth-reighter-ca8-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack