White v. City of Florence, (10th Cir. 2003)

Text

---

UNITED

STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ROY WHITE,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

CITY OF FLORENCE; FLORENCE

POLICE DEPARTMENT; EUGENE

ROEDER, Mayor of the City of

Florence, in his individual and official

capacity; MIKE INGLE, Chief of

Florence Police Department, in his

individual and official capacity,

Defendants,

and

CHUCK PRATT, Sergeant, in his

individual and official capacity,

Defendant-Appellant.

No.
name="1">02-1408

(D.C. No. 01-WY-1779-AJ (MJW))

(D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT
name="txt*">(*)

Before McCONNELL, ANDERSON, and

BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

In this interlocutory appeal, Defendant-Appellant Chuck Pratt challenges

the district court's decision denying him summary judgment on his qualified

immunity defense. "[A]n order denying qualified immunity, to the extent it turns

on an issue of law, is immediately appealable." Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S.

299, 311 (1996) (citation, quotation omitted). In this case, however, the district

court clearly denied Pratt qualified immunity because there remained disputed

material factual issues that precluded summary judgment. It is well established

that such an order is not immediately appealable. See Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S.

304, 313, 319-20 (1995); see also Behrens, 516 U.S. at 313. We,

therefore, do

not have jurisdiction to consider this interlocutory appeal and so DISMISS it.

Entered for the Court

Bobby R. Baldock

Circuit Judge

FOOTNOTES

Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.

*. This order and judgment is not

binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

---