Yvonne West v. DeKalb County, Georgia, et al, No. 24-10682 (11th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 24-10682 Document: 22-1 Date Filed: 05/07/2024 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-10682 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ YVONNE M. WEST, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Jamon West, Plainti -Appellant, versus DEKALB COUNTY, GEORGIA, CAPTAIN PHILLIP DITMORE, SENIOR FIREFIGHTER DAVID KELLY, SENIOR FIREFIGHTER JASON WINKLER, SENIOR FIREFIGHTER KEVIN FLEMING, et al., Defendants-Appellees. USCA11 Case: 24-10682 2 Document: 22-1 Date Filed: 05/07/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 24-10682 ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-01907-LMM ____________________ Before BRANCH, LUCK, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Upon review of the record and the parties’ responses to the jurisdictional question, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because there is not a final or otherwise appealable order. Yvonne West appeals from the district court’s order, and related judgment, that dismissed several defendants. However, the district court entered its dismissal order on February 2, 2024, just over two weeks after it granted West a 40-day extension to serve four unserved defendants with process, and it acknowledged the extension in the dismissal order. Because this extension of the time to serve had not yet expired at the time the district court entered is dismissal order, that order is not final or otherwise immediately appealable even if only unserved defendants remained. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Insinga v. LaBella, 817 F.2d 1469, 1470 (11th Cir. 1987) (providing that an order dismissing all served defendants is not final for purposes of appeal where the district court “is given reason to believe that it is premature to assume that service will not be made on the currently unserved parties”); Freyre v. Chronister, 910 F.3d 1371, 1377 (11th Cir. 2018) (providing USCA11 Case: 24-10682 24-10682 Document: 22-1 Date Filed: 05/07/2024 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 that a district court order which “contemplates further substantive proceedings in a case is not final and appealable”). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
