Ernest Johnson v. George Lombardi, 815 F.3d 451

Background

Ernest Johnson, a Missouri death-row inmate, sued state officials claiming Missouri’s method of execution violates the Eighth Amendment.
The district court dismissed Johnson’s complaint for failure to state a claim, finding he had not pleaded a feasible, readily implementable alternative method of execution.
The district court dismissed without prejudice but invited Johnson to amend; it nonetheless attempted to certify the order for immediate appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) because Johnson’s execution was imminent.
The Supreme Court granted a stay of execution pending resolution of Johnson’s appeal.
The parties briefed the merits, but the appellate court first addressed whether it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the non-final district-court order.
The Eighth Circuit concluded the dismissal was not a final appealable order, Rule 54(b) did not apply to a single-claim action, and thus the court lacked jurisdiction; the appeal was dismissed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district-court dismissal without prejudice was a final, appealable order	Johnson argued the interlocutory certification under Rule 54(b) made the order appealable given imminent execution	State argued the dismissal without prejudice was not final and Rule 54(b) was inapplicable	Dismissal without prejudice is not a final order; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Whether Rule 54(b) can make a single-claim dismissal immediately appealable	Johnson relied on the district court’s Rule 54(b) certification due to time pressure	State maintained Rule 54(b) applies only when multiple claims or parties remain	Rule 54(b) does not apply to single-claim actions; cannot be used to certify this order
Whether exigent circumstances (imminent execution) justified immediate appeal certification	Johnson (and district court) asserted execution schedule created a compelling reason for immediate review	State contended normal finality rules control and stay from the Supreme Court removed urgency	Court noted exigency is moot after Supreme Court stay and found no jurisdiction regardless of prior urgency
Whether dismissal for failure to plead an alternative method was appropriate (merits)	Johnson alleged Eighth Amendment method-of-execution claim requiring feasible alternative	State argued complaint failed to plead requisite feasible, readily implemented alternative	The Eighth Circuit did not reach the merits because it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal

Key Cases Cited

Coniston Corp. v. Vill. of Hoffman Estates, 844 F.2d 461 (7th Cir. 1988) (discusses interlocutory appeals and finality principles)
Local 179, United Textile Workers of Am., AFL-CIO v. Fed. Paper Stock Co., 461 F.2d 849 (8th Cir. 1972) (dismissal without prejudice is generally not a final appealable order)
Hunt v. Hopkins, 266 F.3d 934 (8th Cir. 2001) (order dismissing complaint without indication it was final is not appealable)
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wetzel, 424 U.S. 737 (1976) (Rule 54(b) does not apply to single-claim actions)
Johnson v. Lombardi, 136 S. Ct. 443 (2015) (Supreme Court granted a stay of execution pending appeal)