Jefferson v. Wilmington Svngs Fund Socy ( 2022 )

Case: 20-50232 Document: 00516505982 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/12/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
October 12, 2022
No. 20-50232
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Bakari L. Jefferson,
Plaintiff—Appellant,
versus
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as trustee of
Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust D,
Defendant—Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:19-CV-407
Before Wiener, Dennis, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
This case presents yet another iteration of the “finality trap” which
has vexed both litigants and the courts of appeals for decades. See Williams v.
Seidenbach, 958 F.3d 341, 343 (5th Cir. 2020) (en banc). A party finds itself
in the finality trap when it obtains a partial judgment in the district court and
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-50232 Document: 00516505982 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/12/2022
No. 20-50232
voluntarily dismisses its remaining claims without prejudice. The partial
judgment is not final, and therefore not appealable, and dismissal without
prejudice fails to create any finality in the action under our precedent. Ryan
v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., 577 F.2d 298 (5th Cir. 1978). The party thus
finds itself without an appeal and without any remaining claims before the
district court.
Following our circuit’s rule that the voluntary dismissal does not
create finality because the party “is entitled to bring a later suit on the same
cause of action,” Ryan, 577 F.2d at 302, we DISMISS this appeal for lack
of jurisdiction.
I.
After receiving notice that his house would be sold at public auction,
Bakari Jefferson filed suit against Wilmington Savings Fund Society
(“Wilmington”), that had been assigned the deed of trust in Jefferson’s
property, claiming that Wilmington was barred from pursuing foreclosure by
a four-year statute of limitations found in Texas law. Wilmington asserted
counterclaims of breach of contract and judicial foreclosure to force the sale
of the property. Jefferson never answered these counterclaims.
Wilmington then moved for summary judgment on Jefferson’s statute
of limitations claim. The district court, adopting the report and
recommendation of a magistrate judge, granted Wilmington summary
judgment, finding that Jefferson’s lender had reset the statute of limitations
clock by unilaterally abandoning acceleration of its loan three years prior to
the attempted foreclosure. See Boren v. U.S. Nat. Bank Ass’n, 807 F.3d 99(5th Cir. 2015). The district court entered a judgment granting Wilmington’s
motion for summary judgment and dismissing Jefferson’s claim with
prejudice. Wilmington’s counterclaims for breach of contract and judicial
foreclosure, however, remained unresolved. Jefferson filed a notice of appeal
2
Case: 20-50232 Document: 00516505982 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/12/2022
No. 20-50232
from the district court’s judgment. After the appeal was docketed in this
court and briefing had begun, Wilmington voluntarily dismissed its
counterclaims without prejudice through notice, pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 41(c) and 41(a)(1)(A)(i). This dismissal did not require the
leave of the district court or consent from Jefferson.
II.
Before we can proceed with any appeal, we must assure ourselves of
our own jurisdiction. MidCap Media Fin., L.L.C. v. Pathway Data, Inc., 929
F.3d 310, 313 (5th Cir. 2019). Appellate jurisdiction typically lies only when
there has been a final judgment disposing of all claims as to all parties. 28
U.S.C. § 1291; Fed R. Civ. P. 54(b). An order resolving only some claims
in a case is usually nonfinal and not appealable. Williams, 958 F.3d at 348–49.
And the voluntary dismissal without prejudice of any remaining claims fails
to create finality because the party “is entitled to bring a later suit on the same
cause of action.” Id. at 343 (quoting Ryan, 577 F.2d at 392).
Such is the case in this appeal. The district court partially adjudicated
the claims before it, granting summary judgment and dismissing Jefferson’s
statute of limitations claim, but leaving Wilmington’s breach of contract
claim and judicial foreclosure claim unadjudicated. Jefferson sought to appeal
from this partial judgment, but we lack jurisdiction over such a nonfinal
order. Cooper v. Brown, 844 F.3d 517, 526 (5th Cir. 2016). Wilmington then
voluntarily dismissed its counterclaims without prejudice. This dismissal
also failed to create any finality. Williams, 958 F.3d at 348. Accordingly,
Jefferson’s appeal lacks the finality required to confer jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291.
We DISMISS for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
3