Hobbs & Olsen v. Ebbert

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ----ooOoo---Hobbs & Olsen, L.C., Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Eddie C. Ebbert, Defendant and Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not For Official Publication) Case No. 20060204-CA F I L E D (June 15, 2006) 2006 UT App 248 ----Third District, Salt Lake Department, 020913183 The Honorable Deno G. Himonas Attorneys: Eddie C. Ebbert, Pensacola, Florida, Appellant Pro Se Lincoln W. Hobbs and Jennifer L. Falk, Salt Lake City, for Appellee ----- Before Judges Greenwood, Davis, and Thorne. PER CURIAM: This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. Neither party has filed a response opposing dismissal. The district court presided over a jury trial on February 2, 2006. The court requested counsel for Appellee Hobbs & Olson, L.C., to prepare and circulate an appropriate judgment. On February 21, 2006, Hobbs & Olson filed a motion seeking additional attorney fees incurred at trial. On February 28, 2006, Ebbert filed his notice of appeal, allegedly taken from a final judgment entered on February 2, 2006. He also filed a motion seeking to set aside the jury verdict and for a new trial, which remains pending in the district court. In a memorandum decision dated March 22, 2006, the district court granted Hobbs & Olson's motion for attorney fees and directed counsel to prepare and circulate an appropriate order. The notice of appeal filed on February 28, 2006, was premature because no final, appealable judgment appears in the record before this court. In addition, the notice of appeal was filed prior to the entry of an order resolving Hobbs & Olson's motion for attorney fees. See ProMax Dev. Corp. v. Raile, 2000 UT 4,¶15, 998 P.2d 254 (holding that "a trial court must determine the amount of attorney fees awardable to a party before the judgment becomes final for the purposes of an appeal under Utah Rule of Appellate Procedure 3"). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because no final, appealable judgment appears in the district court record. Our dismissal is without prejudice to a timely appeal filed after entry of final judgment. ______________________________ Pamela T. Greenwood, Associate Presiding Judge ______________________________ James Z. Davis, Judge ______________________________ William A. Thorne Jr., Judge 20060204-CA 2

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.