Hughley v. Eaton Corp., 76-1741
| Decision Date | 22 March 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-1741,76-1741 |
| Citation | 572 F.2d 556 |
| Parties | Johnnie L. HUGHLEY et al., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EATON CORPORATION, etc., Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Robert J. Affeldt, Sylvania, Ohio, for plaintiff-appellant.
John P. Palumbo, Cleveland, Ohio, Stew O. H. Merz, Bruce J. Havighurst, Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant-appellee.
Before CELEBREZZE, LIVELY and ENGEL, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiffs appeal from an order of the district court dismissing their suit seeking relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., for want of prosecution. It appears without dispute upon the record and by the affirmative representations of plaintiffs' counsel at the oral argument upon appeal that plaintiffs' counsel provoked the court to dismiss the action and further, that the failure to appear at the trial date was the result of a conscious choice by plaintiffs to suffer the consequence of dismissal rather than to proceed to trial in the posture of the case as it then stood.
Under the circumstances the court determines that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the suit in the district court without prejudice. It, therefore, follows that by the dismissal of the suit, any rulings which preceded that action by the trial court are thus rendered moot. In this regard the court declines to adopt either the rationale or the holding of Allied Air Freight, Inc. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 393 F.2d 441 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 846, 89 S.Ct. 131, 21 L.Ed.2d 117 (1968), and, on the contrary, holds that the sufferance of a dismissal of a cause without prejudice is not to be employed as an avenue for reaching issues which are not subject to interlocutory appeal as of right. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
John's Insulation, Inc. v. L. Addison and Associates, Inc.
...Cir.1974) (interlocutory rulings did not merge with judgment of dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute); Hughley v. Eaton Corp., 572 F.2d 556, 557 (6th Cir.1978) (same); DuBose v. Minnesota, 893 F.2d 169, 171 (8th Cir.1990) (same); 1 Huey v. Teledyne, Inc., 608 F.2d 1234, 1239 (9......
-
Joseph v. De Castro
......See Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 34, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980); ......
-
Holt v. Pitts
...590 F.2d 609 (5th Cir. 1979); Lopez v. Aransas County Independent School District, 570 F.2d 541 (5th Cir. 1978); Hughley v. Eaton Corp., 572 F.2d 556 (6th Cir. 1978); Marshall v. Sielaff, 492 F.2d 917 (3d Cir. 1974); Conway v. Dunbar, 448 F.2d 765 (9th Cir. 1971); Mayberry v. Robinson, 427 ......
-
Camesi v. Univ. of Pittsburgh Med. Ctr.
...57 L.Ed.2d 351 (1978), in which the Court held that a decertification order was not an appealable final order); Hughley v. Eaton Corp., 572 F.2d 556, 557 (6th Cir.1978) (holding that dismissal for failure to prosecute rendered moot any prior ruling of the district court). We read these case......