Judith A. Hill v. MacMillan School Company, a New York General Partnership, AKA MacMillan School Publishing, Inc., Dba McGraw Inc. Peter Jovanovich

Good Law

102 F.3d 422·96 Daily Journal DAR 14961·1996 WL 709340·36 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 930·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 32216

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 199695-16163California1,388 words

Opinion

Rymer, J.

MacMillan/McGraw-Hill School Company, Peter Jovanovieh, and their attorneys, Terry M. Gordon and Janet Morgan, appeal the district court’s order imposing sanctions against them jointly and severally under Fed. R.Civ.P. 11 for refiling a Rule 8 motion to dismiss that had previously been denied by a different judge. We do not reach the merits of their appeal, however, because an order sanctioning both a party and its attorney is not a collateral order that is reviewable before final judgment is entered. We therefore lack jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal.

I

On September 28, 1993, Judith Hill brought a wrongful termination action in state court against her former employer, MacMillan/McGraw-Hill School Company. MacMillan removed the case to federal court, where it was assigned to Judge Ware, and filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 8 for failure to set forth “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Judge Ware granted the motion and Hill filed an amended complaint, correcting various erroneous citations to the California Code and replacing her claim of “constructive termination” with one of “direct…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.