United States v. Hodges

404 F.3d 354, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4387, 2005 WL 605750
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Hodges. Read the opinion of the Court — 460 F.3d 646
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 16, 2005·No. 04-60305·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Ola Mae Hosley and Roy Hosley seek to appeal the dismissal of their third-party claim to a house that was ordered forfeited as substitute property under 21 U.S.C. § 853(p) following the conviction of Ola Mae Hosley’s son, Michael Lee Hodges, for drug trafficking and money laundering. Other third parties have filed claims, and the record indicates that not all of the third-party claims, including those of Washington Mutual Bank and Stephen Stewart, have been resolved.

“If multiple third-party petitions are filed in the same case, an order dismissing or granting one petition is not appealable until rulings are made on all the petitions, unless the court determines that there is no just reason for delay.” Fed. R. Cium. P. 32.2(c)(3). Rule 32.2(c)(3) “is derived from Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).” Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2 (“Advisory Committee Notes” for subsection c). Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), when an action involves multiple parties or multiple claims, any decision that adjudicates the liability of fewer than all of the parties is not appealable unless certified by the district court. See Thompson v. *355 Betts, 754 F.2d 1243, 1245 (5th Cir.1985). Applying the principles of Rule 54(b), we dismiss the appeal for lack of an appeal-able judgment. See id. at 1247.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

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

United States v. Hodges, 404 F.3d 354, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 4387, 2005 WL 605750 (5th Cir. 2005).

404 F.3d 354 (United States v. Hodges) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wordy Jack Thompson, Jr. v. Judge Charles O. Betts
754 F.2d 1243 (Fifth Circuit, 1985)