McCoy v. Edmeister et al

Filing 132

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER,Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. 131 ) for Findings and Conclusion of Law is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 1/17/2017. (jdh)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS CHRISTOPHER H. MCCOY, Plaintiff, vs. ERIC T. EDMISTER, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 14-cv-01379-JPG-DGW MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Plaintiff has filed a Motion (Doc. 131) for Findings and Conclusions of Law Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(A); however, this matter is currently on appeal. (Doc. 124). “The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance – it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.” Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982). “[T]he district court retains jurisdiction to act only if the order being appealed or the proceeding before the district court is a discrete matter ancillary to the issues under consideration in the other court.” May, 226 F.3d at 879 (citing Kusay v. United States, 62 F.3d 192, 193-94 (7th Cir. 1995)); see Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 395 (1990). The plaintiff is appealing the final judgment in this matter and as such, a motion dealing with the final judgment is not a discrete ancillary matter, but the specific issue on appeal. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 131) for Findings and Conclusion of Law is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 1/17/2017 s/J. Phil Gilbert J. PHIL GILBERT DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?