Bd. of Trs. of the Plumbers, Pipe Fitters & Mechanical Equipment Serv., Local Union No. 392 v. Humbert, 884 F.3d 624

Local 392 sued three related companies (Mechanical, Services, Genesis Corp.) alleging violations of a collective-bargaining agreement and seeking unpaid contributions.
District court initially held all three companies bound by the CBA and liable on summary judgment.
Services and Genesis Corp. appealed; on reconsideration the district court ruled Mechanical and Services bound but Genesis Corp. not, and Local 392 appealed that ruling.
The district court had not determined the amount of damages, so its orders were not final under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Parties (except Mechanical) entered a Stipulated Judgment Order consenting to a ~$45,000 payment "for the sole purpose of proceeding with the appeal," but expressly reserving rights to relitigate issues (including damages).
The Sixth Circuit sua sponte examined whether the Stipulated Judgment Order was a final appealable decision and concluded it was not; the appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court's orders (including the Stipulated Judgment Order) were final under 28 U.S.C. § 1291	The Stipulated Judgment Order resolved liability-and-damages sufficiently to permit immediate appeal (parties agreed it was final)	The Order was final because it disposed of a discrete damage claim and allowed appellate review	Not final: the district court had left damages unresolved and the Stipulated Judgment reserved rights to relitigate, permitting piecemeal appeals; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Whether parties can convert an otherwise nonfinal state into a final appealable judgment by stipulation	Stipulation should cure nonfinality and permit immediate appeal	A stipulation that preserves rights to relitigate or allows future appeals circumvents finality rules and is ineffective	Stipulation cannot create finality if it leaves potential for further litigation or piecemeal appeals; finality cannot be waived by parties' agreement

Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229 (1945) (defines final decision as one that ends litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute judgment)
Microsoft Corp. v. Baker, 137 S. Ct. 1702 (2017) (rejects use of stipulated judgments to manufacture finality and avoid interlocutory-appeal limits)
Page Plus of Atlanta, Inc. v. Owl Wireless, LLC, 733 F.3d 658 (6th Cir. 2013) (a stipulated order that permits piecemeal appeals is not final)
Daleure v. Kentucky, 269 F.3d 540 (6th Cir. 2001) (court must independently assess appellate jurisdiction even if parties concede it)