Susan Parker v. Michael Austin, 691 F. App'x 129

Appellants appealed a district court order (Apr 28, 2015) granting Rule 12(b)(6) motions and dismissing portions of their 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 claims.
After that order, appellant Justis Funkhouser moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2) to voluntarily dismiss the sole remaining claim (Count Six) without prejudice.
The district court granted the Rule 41(a)(2) motion on November 24, 2015, dismissing Count Six without prejudice.
Appellants contended the court of appeals had jurisdiction to hear the appeal of the earlier Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals.
The Fourth Circuit considered whether the post-dismissal posture produced an appealable "final decision."

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court of appeals has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 to review the district court's earlier interlocutory dismissals after the remaining claim was dismissed without prejudice	Appellants argued the court should address the merits of the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals on appeal	Appellees argued there was no final, appealable order because one claim remained dismissed without prejudice, so § 1291 jurisdiction is lacking	The court held there is no final appealable decision because Count Six was dismissed without prejudice; reversed and remanded for completion of the case

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (defining final-judgment-review limitations)
Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229 (defining "final decision" that ends litigation on the merits)
Robinson v. Parke-Davis & Co., 685 F.2d 912 (4th Cir.) (an order disposing of fewer than all claims is not final)
Hunter v. Town of Mocksville, 789 F.3d 389 (4th Cir. 2015) (discussing finality and interlocutory appeals)
Waugh Chapel S., LLC v. United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 27, 728 F.3d 354 (4th Cir. 2013) (split-judgment Rule 41(a)(2) situations and remedies)