Moya v. Schollenbarger

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “a dismissal of the entire action is ordinarily final” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• concluding that, because “the district court in this case intended to dismiss [the plaintiff’s] entire cause of action,” the dismissal without prejudice was final and the appellate court had jurisdiction
• explaining that, because orders expressly granting leave to amend are not final, plaintiffs who choose to appeal rather than amend must first obtain a final judgment from the district court
• reasoning that dismissal of the entire action is ordinarily a final judgment
• noting, in that situation, “the district court must have intended to dismiss the entire action and our appellate jurisdiction is proper”
• ordering each party to “bear their own costs and fees” indicates finality

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).