EDDIE B. STROZIER, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION (LAKEWOOD ASSEMBLY PLANT), DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the district court's judgment failed to adjudicate all of the plaintiff's claims.
Plaintiff sued his employer for racial discrimination under Title VII and Section 1981, alleging four specific instances. The district court dismissed…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Racial Discrimination Under Title Vii cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Strozier brought this action against his employer, General Motors Corp., under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C.A. § 1981. In his complaint he alleged four specific instances of racial discrimination.1 General Motors filed a motion for summary judgment, but the District Court deferred ruling on it pending the outcome on appeal of either Stansell v. Sherwin-Williams Co., Civil No. C75-379A (N.D.Ga., Nov. 18, 1975), or Turner v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 401 F.Supp. 1179, 11 F.E.P. 748 (N.D.Tex.1975). Following this Court’s decisions in Turner v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 5 Cir., 1977, 556 F. 2d 1349, and Page v. U. S. Industries, Inc., 5 Cir., 1977, 556 F. 2d 346, the District Court ordered the parties to file renewed motions.
Defendant accordingly submitted its renewed motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment. Plaintiff then filed a motion to amend, asserting an additional claim. In its order of December 22, 1977,2 the District Court dismissed the first two claims and granted summary judgment on the second two, but did not address either the motion to amend or the additional claim. Because the judgment fails to adjudicate all of Strozier’s claims as required by F.R.Civ.P. 54(b), we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.3 General Motors Corp. v. Dade Bonded Warehouse, Inc., 5 Cir., 1974, 498 F. 2d 327.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
. For a more detailed procedural and factual history, see the District Court’s opinion. Stro-zier v. General Motors Corp., N.D.Ga., 1977, 442 F.Supp. 475.
. Strozier v. General Motors Corp., N.D.Ga., 1977, 442 F.Supp. 475.
. We also point out that the District Judge filed no certificate under F.R.Civ.P. 54(b), indicating that there is no just reason for delay.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Setser v. Novack Inv. Co., 638 F.2d 1137 (8th Cir. 1981)
-
Whatley v. Dep't OF Educ., 673 F.2d 873 (5th Cir. 1982)
-
Pettinelli v. Danzig, 644 F.2d 1160 (5th Cir. 1981)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Page v. U. S. Indus., Inc., 556 F.2d 346 (5th Cir. 1977)
- Gen. Motors Corp. v. Dade Bonded Warehouse, Inc., 498 F.2d 327 (5th Cir. 1974)
- Turner v. Tex. Instruments, Inc., 556 F.2d 1349 (5th Cir. 1977)