The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
ELAINE R. SMITH,
Plaintiff, Case No. 3:23-cv-365
vs.
MIAMI VALLEY HOSPITAL, et al., District Judge Michael J. Newman
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. No. 35)
______________________________________________________________________________
This case is before the Court upon Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment (Doc.
No. 35), which remains pending even though Defendants have filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. No.
58). Defendants are appealing this Court’s Order (1) denying Defendants’ motion to stay
discovery pending a ruling on a motion for partial summary judgment; and (2) holding the qualified
immunity determination in abeyance. Doc. No. 56.
“The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance—it confers
jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects
of the case involved in the appeal.” Greer v. Strange Honey Farm, LLC, 114 F.4th 605, 612 (6th
Cir. 2024) (quoting Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) (per
curiam)). A limited exception to this general “jurisdiction-divestiture rule” exists “for a notice of
appeal from a ‘clearly nonappealable order[.]’” Id. (quoting Cochran v. Birkel, 651 F2d 1219,
1221 (6th Cir. 1981)).
In the instant case, it is reasonably debatable whether the Order now on appeal (Doc. No.
56) constitutes a “clearly nonappealable order” due to its potential impact on the qualified
immunity arguments Defendants raise in their motion for partial summary judgment. See Doc.
No. 35. Consequently, Defendants’ appeal triggers the general jurisdictional-divesture rule,
meaning this Court presently lacks jurisdiction to rule on Defendants’ motion for partial summary
judgment. See Greer, 114 F.4th at 612.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment
WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling after the conclusion of Defendants’ current appeal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 17, 2025 s/Michael J. Newman
Hon. Michael J. Newman
United States District Judge