William B. Tanner Co., Inc. v. U.S.
| Decision Date | 15 May 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-2367,76-2367 |
| Citation | 575 F.2d 101 |
| Parties | 78-1 USTC P 9440 WILLIAM B. TANNER COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Elijah Noel, Jr., Louis R. Lucas, Ratner, Sugarmon, Lucas & Salky, G. Philip Arnold, Memphis, Tenn., for plaintiff-appellant.
J. Michael Cody, U. S. Atty., Memphis, Tenn., Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert Andrews, Tax Div., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Myron C. Baum, Crombie J. D. Garrett, John G. Manning, Washington, D. C., for defendant-appellee.
Before EDWARDS and CELEBREZZE, Circuit Judges and CECIL, Senior Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of the United States but not adjudicating the liability of other defendants. Despite the clear language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) and several equally clear holdings of this Court, appellant neither sought nor received a Rule 54(b) certification that the order in question was a final judgment. Therefore, there was no final decision in terms of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and this Court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Balsbaugh v. City of Westland, 458 F.2d 1358 (6th Cir. 1972); Partin v. Hassan Motors, Inc., 363 F.2d 104 (6th Cir. 1966); Gabbard v. Rose, 330 F.2d 705 (6th Cir. 1964).
Since, however, a Rule 54(b) certification appears to be appropriate in this case, if appellant is able to obtain such from the district court within thirty days of the date of filing of this opinion, the appeal will be reinstated by the clerk, after appropriate notice of appeal and other jurisdictional prerequisites, for prompt disposition by this panel without additional briefing or oral argument.
Dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gillis v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services
...is no final judgment in terms of Sec. 1291 and that this Court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. William B. Tanner Co. v. United States, 575 F.2d 101 (6th Cir.1978). However, we learned from plaintiffs' counsel for the first time during oral argument that none of the individua......
-
Zuniga v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan, s. 93-1536
...than all the claims involved, this Court found it was nonappealable. Zuniga, No. 92-1315/1348 at 2 (citing William B. Tanner Co. v. United States, 575 F.2d 101, 102 (6th Cir.1978)). Also, the district court's order was not a final judgment at that time because the Due Process claim was yet ......
-
Lakeland Regional Health System v. Whi, 1:08-cv-72.
...of Avon Lake City Sch. Dist. v. Patrick M., 215 F.3d 1325, 2000 WL 712500, *4 n. 5 (6th Cir. May 24, 2000) (citing Wm. B. Tanner Co. v. US, 575 F.2d 101, 102 (6th Cir. 1978))). 1. WHI states that this plaintiff conducts business under the name "Lakeland Regional Medical Center." Def's Reply......
-
LOZAR v. BIRDS EYE FOODS, INC., Case No. 1:09-cv-10.
...appealable. See Griffin v. Reznick, 609 F.Supp.2d 695, 708-09 (W.D.Mich.2008) (Maloney, C.J.) (citing, inter alia, Tanner Co. v. US, 575 F.2d 101, 102 (6th Cir. 1978)). 1 BEF has not disputed the Lozars' allegations that every one of the plaintiffs is a domiciliary of Michigan, and that BEF......