Tag Archives: Collateral Order Doctrine

Even Where the Underlying Defense Is Qualified Immunity, There is No Collateral-Order Appeal from a District Court’s Denying a Dispositive Motion That Exceeds the Page Limits Set by Local Rules, Holds Tenth Circuit

In Jefferson v. Moore, No. 25-3020 (10th Cir. June 5, 2026), the Tenth Circuit dismisses an appeal of a qualified immunity defense where the district court “denied the motion without prejudice” because “Defendants’ motion exceeded the page limits set by the local rules and, alternatively, that their motion for summary judgment was premature.” In responseContinue reading “Even Where the Underlying Defense Is Qualified Immunity, There is No Collateral-Order Appeal from a District Court’s Denying a Dispositive Motion That Exceeds the Page Limits Set by Local Rules, Holds Tenth Circuit”

District Court’s Failure to Adjudicate Qualified Immunity “At the Earliest Possible Stage in the Litigation” Subject to Appeal Under Collateral-Order Doctrine, Holds Fifth Circuit

In Wertenbroch v. Hardeman, No. 25-40616 (5th Cir. June 3, 2026), the Fifth Circuit holds that even a non-response by a district court to a motion for qualified immunity can serve as an “implicit denial . . . that is immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine.” Plaintiffs sued the City Manager of Pittsburg, Texas forContinue reading “District Court’s Failure to Adjudicate Qualified Immunity “At the Earliest Possible Stage in the Litigation” Subject to Appeal Under Collateral-Order Doctrine, Holds Fifth Circuit”

Tenth Circuit Expresses Doubt About Whether An Order Denying Absolute Litigation Privilege Is Appealable Under the Collateral Order Doctrine

In Vivos Therapeutics. v. Ortho-Tain, No. 24-1061 (10th Cir. July 8, 2025), the panel suggests in dicta that “orders denying absolute immunity under the litigation privilege” may not be subject to interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine, though it ultimately dismisses the appeal on other grounds. Colorado state law recognizes an absolute litigation privilegeContinue reading “Tenth Circuit Expresses Doubt About Whether An Order Denying Absolute Litigation Privilege Is Appealable Under the Collateral Order Doctrine”

Ninth Circuit Holds That It Had Jurisdiction Under Collateral-Order Doctrine to Review Sanction Against U.S. Attorney

In United States v. Cloud, No. 22-30044 (9th Cir. May 21, 2024), the Ninth Circuit holds that even before entry of a conviction against the criminal defendant, the United States could appeal a district court order, under the collateral-order, directing the Government to pay monetary sanctions for an alleged Brady violation. Mid-trial during a homicideContinue reading “Ninth Circuit Holds That It Had Jurisdiction Under Collateral-Order Doctrine to Review Sanction Against U.S. Attorney”

Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motion to Dismiss Not Appealable Under Collateral-Order Doctrine Holds Tenth Circuit, Noting Split in Circuits

In Coomer v. Make Your Life Epic LLC, No. 23-1109 (10th Cir. Apr. 23, 2024), the Tenth Circuit dismissed an attempted appeal of an order denying a “special motion to dismiss” under a state anti-SLAPP statue, holding that it did not fit within the confines of the collateral-order doctrine. Many jurisdictions have anti-SLAPP (Strategic LawsuitContinue reading “Denial of Anti-SLAPP Motion to Dismiss Not Appealable Under Collateral-Order Doctrine Holds Tenth Circuit, Noting Split in Circuits”

D.C. Circuit Holds That Party May Appeal Denial of Motion to Seal Exhibits with “Private Medical Treatments and Diagnoses” Under Collateral Order Doctrine

In Abdelhady v. George Washington Univ., No. 22-7148 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 9, 2024), the D.C. Circuit holds that a party may immediately appeal the denial of a motion to seal summary judgment exhibits containing “private medical treatments and diagnoses” under the collateral order doctrine. Plaintiff brought a personal injury case against the university. “In theContinue reading “D.C. Circuit Holds That Party May Appeal Denial of Motion to Seal Exhibits with “Private Medical Treatments and Diagnoses” Under Collateral Order Doctrine”

Second Circuit Adds to Split About Whether There is Appellate Jurisdiction Over Qualified Immunity Orders That Are Not Decided on the Merits

In Maye v. City of New Haven, No. 23-459 (2d Cir. Dec. 26, 2023), The Second Circuit joins the Fifth Circuit in holding that there is no appellate jurisdiction over the denial of summary judgment on a qualified immunity defense that is denied for reasons extrinsic to the merits. The First and Eleventh Circuits haveContinue reading “Second Circuit Adds to Split About Whether There is Appellate Jurisdiction Over Qualified Immunity Orders That Are Not Decided on the Merits”

Fourth Circuit Holds That It Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Under Perlman Doctrine to Review Criminal Defendant’s Interlocutory Appeal Concerning a Grand Jury Subpoena

In In re Grand Jury 2021 Subpoenas, No. 22-1654 (4th Cir. Nov. 22, 2023), the Fourth Circuit holds that because of Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100 (2009) – which scaled back the collateral-order doctrine as applied to attorney-client privilege – it must reassess the continued viability of the Perlman doctrine (Perlman v.Continue reading “Fourth Circuit Holds That It Lacks Appellate Jurisdiction Under Perlman Doctrine to Review Criminal Defendant’s Interlocutory Appeal Concerning a Grand Jury Subpoena”

Anonymity for Plaintiff Properly Revoked When Litigant Sought Publicity and “Disseminated Sensitive Material” About the Defendant, Holds Tenth Circuit

In Luo v. Wang, No. 22-1200 (10th Cir. July 3, 2023), a rare published opinion about the revocation of a pseudonym in a civil case, the Tenth Circuit affirms the lower courts reconsideration of the plaintiff’s use of the “Jane Doe” appellation when it came to light that the plaintiff had been seeking media attentionContinue reading “Anonymity for Plaintiff Properly Revoked When Litigant Sought Publicity and “Disseminated Sensitive Material” About the Defendant, Holds Tenth Circuit”

Third Circuit Panel Divides Over Whether a Federal Agent Can Take an Interlocutory Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine of an Order Denying Dismissal of a Bivens Cause of Action

In Graber v. Boresky, No. 21-1407 (3d Cir. Feb. 10, 2023), a 2-1 panel holds that there is no automatic interlocutory appeal under the collateral order doctrine of a district court decision on a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion that there is a cause of action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of FederalContinue reading “Third Circuit Panel Divides Over Whether a Federal Agent Can Take an Interlocutory Appeal Under the Collateral Order Doctrine of an Order Denying Dismissal of a Bivens Cause of Action”