Diana Berrios v. Michael Shin
700 F. App'x 222
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Michael Shin appealed a district court order that granted Diana C. Berrios’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs.
- At the time Shin filed his notice of appeal, the district court had dismissed Berrios’ remaining claims against Green Wireless, LLC and Michael Pak, making the fee order appear final.
- After the notice of appeal, Berrios filed a timely Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment; the district court granted it and reinstated her claims against Green and Pak.
- Because the Rule 59(e) motion was timely, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(i) suspended Shin’s notice of appeal until the district court resolved that motion.
- With the dismissal vacated and claims reinstated, the district court’s fee order was no longer final or immediately appealable as a collateral order; the issue of fees can be reviewed on appeal from a final judgment.
- The Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and denied oral argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appellate court has jurisdiction over an appeal of an attorney’s-fees order when a timely Rule 59(e) motion later reinstates remaining claims | Shin argued the fee order was appealable because it appeared final when he filed his notice of appeal | Berrios argued the timely Rule 59(e) motion suspended the appeal and reinstated claims, making the fee order nonfinal | Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction: the Rule 59(e) tolling made the fee order nonfinal and not an appealable collateral order |
Key Cases Cited
- Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694 (4th Cir. 2015) (explaining finality requirement for appellate jurisdiction)
- Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v. Central Pension Fund, 134 S. Ct. 773 (2014) (defining a final decision that ends litigation on the merits)
- United States v. Silvers, 90 F.3d 95 (4th Cir. 1996) (Rule 4(a)(4) tolling of appeals during timely Rule 59 motions)
- Ross v. Marshall, 426 F.3d 745 (5th Cir. 2005) (tolling effect of post-appeal Rule 59 motions on appellate jurisdiction)
- Cobra Nat. Res., LLC v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Review Comm’n, 742 F.3d 82 (4th Cir. 2014) (elements of the collateral-order doctrine)
- Dardar v. Lafourche Realty Co., 849 F.2d 955 (5th Cir. 1988) (attorney’s-fee awards can be reviewed on appeal from a final judgment)
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949) (scope of immediately appealable collateral orders)