David White, Plaintiff-appellant, v. the University of Tulsa-college of Law, the University Oftulsa; Professors Chapman, Hager, Limas, Tanaka,clark, Adams; and Sheila Powers,defendants-appellees, 953 F.2d 1392 (10th Cir. 1992)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit - 953 F.2d 1392 (10th Cir. 1992) Feb. 4, 1992

Before SEYMOUR, STEPHEN H. ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.* 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT** 

BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.


The district court partially dismissed various counts of Plaintiff-Appellant's first amended complaint against various Defendants-Appellees. Defendant-Appellee Tanaka and the other Defendants-Appellees filed motions to dismiss for lack of a final order conferring appellate jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); 10th Cir.R. 27.2.1. On July 30, 1991, we notified the parties that we were considering summary dismissal for lack of appellate jurisdiction explaining that the appeal would be dismissed summarily in the absence of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) certification or a final order. See Lewis v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 850 F.2d 641, 645-46 (10th Cir. 1988) (en banc). Briefing was tolled. We then referred the motions to dismiss to a merits panel and set out a briefing schedule. Upon reviewing the briefs and the motion to dismiss, we must conclude that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

 *

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The cause therefore is ordered submitted without oral argument

 **

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir.R. 36.3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.