Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Unpublished Dispositionclarence Washington, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Robert Turner, et al., Defendants-appellees
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. - 812 F.2d 1409
Jan. 5, 1987
Before ENGEL, KRUPANSKY and RYAN, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of the motion to dismiss filed by the Attorney General for the State of Tennessee. Appellant has not responded thereto.
On January 24, 1986, appellant filed his complaint, apparently pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The basis for appellant's complaint is his allegation that his employment at the Hospital Kitchen of the Tennessee State Penitentiary was terminated because he is black. On June 10, 1986, the district court entered an order granting appellee Turner's motion to consolidate appellant's action with several other similar prisoner civil rights actions. On July 11, 1986, the district court entered a "Fifth Draft Order of Settlement".
A review of the draft "order" reveals that it is not a final order. The draft "order" does not finally dispose of all issues in the case; it describes the interim relief pending approval of the plan contemplated by the order, and allows for objections to the proposed plans. As such, the draft "order" is remedial in nature and nonappealable. Cf. Groseclose v. Dutton, 788 F.2d 356 (6th Cir.1986). See also In re Chicken Antitrust Litigation, etc., 669 F.2d 228 (5th Cir.1982).
For the reasons stated, the district court order of July 11, 1986, is nonappealable. The motion to dismiss is granted and this appeal is hereby dismissed.