SEYMOUR SCHULNER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JACK ECKERD CORPORATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
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 court held that an order reinstating a plaintiff to their former position pending a determination of damages is an appealable interlocutory order granting an injunction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
Appellants appealed an order directing them to reinstate the plaintiff to his former position after a jury found for the plaintiff on an Age Discrimin…
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 Employment Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Jack Eckerd Corporation and J. Byrons Enterprises appeal under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(a)(1) (West 1982) from an order directing them to reinstate plaintiff to his former position as Merchandise Manager. This order was entered after a jury found for the plaintiff on his claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. 29 U.S.C.A. § 621, et seq. (West 1982). The issue of compensatory damages was reserved for determination by the trial court, and a final judgment has yet to be entered.
It is well-established that the granting of an injunction is appealable as an interlocutory order even though the trial court may have reserved its determination of remaining issues, such as compensatory damages. See, e.g., Laje v. R.E. Thomason General Hospital, 564 F. 2d 1159, 1161-62 & n. 1 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 437 U.S. 905, 98 S.Ct. 3091, 57 L.Ed.2d 1134 (1978);1 Williams Electronics v. Artic International, Inc., 685 F. 2d 870, 871 (3d Cir.1982); United States v. County of Humboldt, 615 F. 2d 1260, 1261 (9th Cir.1980); Williams v. St. Louis Diecasting Corp., 611 F. 2d 1223, 1224 (8th Cir.1979); Garzaro v. University of Puerto Rico, 575 F. 2d 335, 337-38 (1st Cir. 1978).
It is also clear that the trial court’s order that plaintiff be reinstated pending a determination of damages was “in the nature of an injunction.” Laje v. R.E. Thomason General Hospital, 564 F. 2d at 1161;2 see Carson v. American Brands, Inc., 450 U.S. 79, 84-86, 101 S.Ct. 993, 996-98, 67 L.Ed.2d 59 (1981); Roberts v. St. Regis Paper Co., 653 F. 2d 166, 169-70 (5th Cir. 1981); Tokarcik v. Forest Hills School District, 665 F. 2d 443, 446-47 (3d Cir.1981), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 102 S.Ct. 3508, 73 L.Ed.2d 1383 (1982); Lewis v. Tobacco Workers’ International Union, 577 F. 2d 1135, 1138-39 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1089, 99 S.Ct. 871, 59 L.Ed.2d 56 (1979); Stricklin v. Regents of the University of Wisconsin, 420 F. 2d 1257, 1258-59 (7th Cir.1970).
See generally, C. Wright & A. Miller, 16 Federal Practice & Procedure: Jurisdiction § 3922, at 29 (1977).
We therefore hold that the reinstatement order is appealable under § 1292(a)(1) as an interlocutory order granting an injunction.
Finding no merit in appellants’ several arguments regarding the propriety of the reinstatement order, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
. In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F. 2d 1206 (11th Cir.1981) (en banc), this court adopted as binding precedent all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on September 30, 1981. Id. at 1209.
. In Laje, the plaintiff, a psychiatrist, had been discharged from a hospital and denied staff privileges. The trial court, while reserving its decision as to the legality of the plaintiff’s termination, ordered the hospital to grant him staff privileges. The court held that this order was appealable as an injunction under § 1292(a)(1). See 564 F. 2d at 1161.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parks v. Pavkovic, 753 F.2d 1397 (7th Cir. 1985)…87 S.Ct. 193, 195, 17 L.Ed.2d 23 (1966); Donovan v. Robbins, 752 F. 2d 1170, 1172-76 (7th Cir.1985). Grants of permanent injunctions always are. See, e.g., 16 Wright, Miller, Cooper & Gressman, supra, § 3924, at p. 67; Schulner v. Jack Eckerd Corp. 706 F. 2d 1113, 1114 (11th Cir.1983) (per curiam); Laffey v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 642 F. 2d 578, 584 n. 49 (D.C.Cir.1980). Although we thus have appellate jurisdiction, we must consider the state’s argument that the suit became moot before it was certified a…
-
King Instrument Corp. v. Otari Corp., 814 F.2d 1560 (Fed. Cir. 1987)…nvolving any injunctive relief regardless of whether all other issues have been finally adjudicated. E.g., American Cyanamid Co. v. Lincoln Laboratories, 403 F. 2d 486, 488, 159 USPQ 577, 578 (7th Cir.1968). See also Schulner v. Jack Eckerd Corp., 706 F. 2d 1113, 1114 (11th Cir.1983). In addition, when appellate jurisdiction is conferred on a court of appeals through the trial court’s grant of injunctive relief, “the entire order, and not simply the propriety of the injunctive relief, is before the court…
-
Prohosky v. The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am., 767 F.2d 387 (7th Cir. 1985)…eral Practice and Procedure § 3924, at 67 (1977)). Thus, we have jurisdiction to review the district court’s grant of permanent injunctive relief even though the parties have not yet litigated the issue of damages. See Schulner v. Jack Eckerd Corp., 706 F. 2d 1113, 1114 (11th Cir.1983). . In dissent, Justice Hunter summarized the majority’s holding in Wiggins as "the rule that ground water belongs to the owner of the land under which it flows and that it may be used as the owner wishes despite injury to neig…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (13 total)
- Bonner v. City OF Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981)
- Carson v. Am. Brands, Inc., 450 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1981)
- Tokarcik v. Forest Hills Sch. Dist., 665 F.2d 443 (3d Cir. 1981)
- Roberts v. ST. Regis Paper Co., 653 F.2d 166 (5th Cir. 1981)
- Williams Elecs., Inc. v. Artic Int'l, Inc., 685 F.2d 870 (3d Cir. 1982)
- Lewis v. Tobacco Workers' Int'l Union, 577 F.2d 1135 (4th Cir. 1978)
- Johnson v. Gen. Motors Assembly Div., 437 U.S. 905 (U.S. 1978)
- Golz v. Illinois, 437 U.S. 905 (U.S. 1978)
- Laje v. R. E. Thomason Gen. Hosp., 564 F.2d 1159 (5th Cir. 1977)
- Garzaro v. The Univ. OF Puerto RICO, 575 F.2d 335 (1st Cir. 1978)