Outlaw v. Airtech Air Conditioning & Heating, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a premature notice of appeal of decision disposing of plaintiffs claims against some but not all defendants — which would have been appealable pursuant to Rule 54(b) — -ripened upon the entry of final judgment
• noting that FirsTier’s discussion reflects “a rather imprecise guide for a jurisdictional rule”
• basing its jurisdiction on the fact that the district court could have entered judgment on the appealed from claims using Rule 54(b)
• “We agree with decisions concluding that those prior lines of precedent must be limited in light of FirsTier.”
• premature appeal saved because decision would have been appealable if immediately followed by entry of judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b)
• “We agree with decisions concluding that those prior lines of precedent must be limited in light of FirsTier.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).