explaining that “we liberally construe” the requirement under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c) that “the notice of appeal must ‘designate the judgment, order, or part thereof appealed from’”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that “we liberally construe” the requirement under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c) that “the notice of appeal must ‘designate the judgment, order, or part thereof appealed from’”
- explaining that “[s]ince only a final judgment is appealable, the appeal from a final judgment draws in question all prior non-final orders and rulings"
- holding that notice of appeal mentioning only order granting summary judgment also authorizes appellate review of earlier discovery order
- finding sufficient intent to appeal a discovery order from plaintiffs’ notice of appeal from summary judgment order and arguments in plaintiffs’ opening appellate brief
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WILLIAM STAFFORD, Senior District Judge,
dissenting.
I cannot agree that the district judge erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Macy’s. Macy’s offered Joanna Pacitti the opportunity of starring in the 20th Anniversary Broadway production *779 and national tour of “Annie.” Joanna Pa-citti received that opportunity. She auditioned for the part of Annie; she was selected by the show’s producers to play the part of Annie; and she, in fact, played the part of Annie, performing in over one hundred performances in six cities during the production’s national tour. She did not, however, appear on Broadway because the producers decided to replace her before the Broadway opening.
The district court concluded, and I agree, that Joanna Pacitti received the benefit of her bargain with Macy’s. Because I do not believe that her contract with Macy’s was subject to the interpretation urged by Plaintiffs, I must respectfully dissent.