UHP Products Inc v. Wilco Supply Inc
This text of UHP Products Inc v. Wilco Supply Inc (UHP Products Inc v. Wilco Supply Inc) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-21169 Summary Calendar
UHP PRODUCTS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WILCO SUPPLY, INC.; ET AL., Defendants,
SPIR STAR DRUCKSCHLÄUCHE GMBH, Defendant-Appellee.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-3166 -------------------- August 10, 2000
Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, SMITH, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This court must determine whether it has appellate
jurisdiction, and the appellants bear the burden of establishing
jurisdiction. Acoustic Sys., Inc. v. Wenger Corp., 207 F.3d 287,
289 (5th Cir. 2000). Federal appellate courts have jurisdiction
over appeals only from (1) final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291;
(2) orders that are deemed final due to jurisprudential exception
or which have been properly certified as final pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 54(b); and (3) interlocutory orders that fall into
specific classes, 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a), or which have been
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 99-21169 -2-
properly certified for appeal by the district court, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1292(b). Askenase v. LivingWell, Inc., 981 F.2d 807, 809-10
(5th Cir. 1993). When an action involves multiple parties, any
decision that adjudicates the liability of fewer than all of the
parties does not terminate the action and is therefore not
appealable unless certified by the district court under Rule
54(b). Borne v. A & P Boat Rentals No. 4, Inc., 755 F.2d 1131,
1133 (5th Cir. 1985); Thompson v. Betts, 754 F.2d 1243, 1245 (5th
Cir. 1985).
The dismissal of Spir Star Druckschläuche GmbH for lack of
personal jurisdiction did not dispose of all the parties, and the
district court did not certify that the order was a final
judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b). Further, an interlocutory
decree dismissing a party for lack of personal jurisdiction in an
admiralty case is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(3).
Allen v. Okam Holdings, Inc., 116 F.3d 153, 154 (5th Cir. 1997).
The appeal is DISMISSED for this court’s lack of
jurisdiction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
UHP Products Inc v. Wilco Supply Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/uhp-products-inc-v-wilco-supply-inc-ca5-2000.