United States v. 27.09 Acres Of Land

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 final judgment had not been entered despite the district court’s closing of the case “administratively for statistical purposes” (quotation marks omitted)
• “[I]t appears that no ‘final judgment’ for EAJA purposes was ever entered in this action,” therefore, the party’s “EAJA application was . . . premature and the district court lacked jurisdiction to decide it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).