Duane Morris Class Action Review - 2023 - Report - Page 64
Regarding § 1291, the Ninth Circuit noted that federal appellate courts have jurisdiction
over appeals from “all final decisions” of district courts, and that a decision is final under
§ 1291 if it “(1) is a full adjudication of the issues, and (2) clearly evidences the judge’s
intention that it be the court’s final act in the matter.” Id. at *1 (citation omitted). Here,
the district court’s June 2021 order did not fully resolve the underlying litigation on the
merits, nor did it resolve the more circumscribed issue of common benefit fees because
the district court left unanswered the value of the common-benefit work, the appellants’
entitlement to common benefit fees, and the amount of the total fee award.
Regarding the collateral order doctrine – under which federal appellate courts can
review a “small class” of rulings that do not conclude the litigation but which “finally
determine claims of right separable from, and collateral to, rights asserted in the action,
too important to be denied review and too independent of the cause itself to require that
appellate consideration be deferred until the whole case is adjudicated” – the Ninth
Circuit held that it did not apply under the circumstances. Id. at *2. To meet the
requirements of the collateral order doctrine, the order sought to be appealed must: (i)
conclusively determine the disputed question; (ii) resolve an important issue completely
separate from the merits of the action; and (iii) be effectively unreviewable on appeal
from a final judgment. Here, the Ninth Circuit held that the appellants’ attempt to invoke
the collateral order doctrine failed at the third requirement. The Ninth Circuit noted that
the district court’s June 2021 order is reviewable on appeal because if the appellants
prevail, they can recoup improperly disbursed fees. The Ninth Circuit further noted that
the denial of common-benefit fees from certain sources does not present a “serious” or
“important” question implicating rights that would be destroyed absent immediate
review. Therefore, the Ninth Circuit held that it lacked jurisdiction and did not reach the
merits of the issues being appealed.
D.
Rulings Involving Other Appellate Issues In Class Action Litigation
There were other noteworthy, appeal-related decisions in 2022 in class action cases
that did not involve Rule 23(f) or § 1292(b).
For example, an Eleventh Circuit decision from November 2022 examined whether the
dismissal of claims brought by the named plaintiffs in a proposed FLSA collective action
also resulted in the dismissal of claims brought by opt-ins such that the dismissal order
constituted a “final decision” under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. In Adams, et al. v. Palm Beach
County, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 32686 (11th Cir. Nov. 28, 2022), the plaintiffs were golf
course rangers asserting a proposed class and collective action seeking back wages
from the defendant Palm Beach County, Florida. The plaintiffs worked at the
defendant’s golf club and alleged that in connection with their “volunteer” positions they
did the same work that private golf facilities hired and paid employees to complete, but
were not paid a salary. The plaintiffs claimed that this violated the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA), the Florida Minimum Wage Act, and Article X of the Florida Constitution.
The district court dismissed the plaintiffs’ initial and amended complaints because the
positions the plaintiffs accepted were “clearly and unequivocally advertised as volunteer
positions,” and the advertisements did not mention that the plaintiffs would be paid.
Regarding the plaintiffs’ appeal of the district court’s decision, the Eleventh Circuit held
63
© Duane Morris LLP 2023
Duane Morris Class Action Review – 2023
