The opinion
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________________
No. 96-30575
_____________________________
VYRON L. BROWN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GEORGIA COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE, ET AL.
Defendants,
INTEGON INDEMNITY CORPORATION
Defendant-Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
( 95-CV-267 )
_________________________________________________________________
December 26, 1996
Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM*:
Vyron Brown brought this action for damages under a bid bond
which Integon had issued to Brown so that Brown could bid on a
government contract. Because Brown owed Integon approximately
$3500.00, guaranteed by a promissory note, Integon refused to issue
further bonds necessary for Brown to begin work. Integon
*
Pursuant to Local 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
counterclaimed on the promissory note and moved for summary
judgment on Brown’s contract claim. The district court granted
summary judgment dismissing Brown’s contract claim. But, neither
the Order Granting Summary Judgment nor the ensuing Judgment
disposed of Integon’s counterclaim. The district court made no
FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b) “express determination that there is no just
reason for delay”, allowing appeal of the contract claim before the
counterclaim was addressed.
In the absence of an express determination that there is no
just reason for delay, the dismissal of complaint by summary
judgment, which does not dispose of a counterclaim, does not
constitute an appealable final order. Belmont Place Associates v.
Blyth, Eastman, Dillon and Co., Inc, 565 F.2d 1322, 1322-23 (5th
Cir. 1978); see also Johnson v. McDole, 526 F.2d 710 (5th Cir.
1976). The summary judgment order acknowledges Integon’s
counterclaim, but does not dispose of it. We therefore have no
jurisdiction over this appeal.
DISMISSED