Hunter v. Corrections Corporation of America et al

Filing 150

ORDER that even though there is an appeal pending in this case, it does not divest this Court of jurisdiction and the case will proceed to trial on the deadlines set in the Courts June 19th Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 7/7/17. (cmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
CURTIS HUNTER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF
)
AMERICA; JASON MEDLIN; RON DAY; )
JAY PHILLIPS; and DAMON HININGER, )
)
Defendants.
)
_________

CV 314-035

ORDER
_________
On July 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal seeking the Eleventh Circuit’s
review of the Court’s June 19th Order. (Doc. no. 143.) Although filing a notice of appeal
generally deprives a district court of jurisdiction over the issues involved in an appeal, “a
notice of appeal filed with respect to a non-appealable order does not have any effect on the
district court’s jurisdiction.” United States v. Riolo, 398 F. App’x 568, 571 (11th Cir. 2010)
(citing United States v. Hitchmon, 602 F.2d 689, 694 (5th Cir. 1979)1(en banc)). A partial
summary judgment grant is not interlocutorily appealable. See Stillman v. Travelers Ins.
Co., 88 F.3d 911, 914 (11th Cir. 1996) (“A partial summary judgment is not a ‘final’
judgment subject to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 unless the district court certifies it as

1

In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), the
Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent all Fifth Circuit decisions that were handed down
prior to the close of business on September 30, 1981.

final under Rule 54(b).”) (quoting General Television Arts, Inc. v. Southern Ry. Co., 725
F.2d 1327, 1331 (11th Cir. 1984)). Therefore, Plaintiff’s appeal to the Eleventh Circuit does
not divest this Court of jurisdiction and the case will proceed to trial on the deadlines set in
the Court’s June 19th Order. (Doc. no. 142.)
SO ORDERED this 7th day of July, 2017, at Augusta, Georgia.

2