Case ID: f-appx_421/html/0478-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GRAND ACADIAN, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. FLUOR ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Cross-Defendant-Appellee, v. Dexter J. Honore; Dexter Honore Construction Company, Limited Liability Corporation, Defendants-Cross-Claimants-Appellants.
    No. 10-30371
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 12, 2011.
    William Lee Melancon, Esq., Melancon & Associates, L.L.C., Lafayette, LA, for Defendants-Cross-Claimants-Appellants.
    Brandon Kelly Black, Jones Walker, Margaret Lynn Tooke, Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Phillips, L.L.P., Baton Rouge, LA, Karen Daniel Ancelet, Esq., Onebane Law Firm, Lafayette, LA, Richard John Tyler, Jones Walker, L.L.P., New Orleans, LA, for Defendant-Cross-Defendant-Ap-pellee.
    Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Defendants-Appellants Dexter J. Hon-oré and Dexter Honoré Construction Company (DXHC) appeal from the district court’s entry of summary judgment that dismissed their claims against Cross-Defendant-Appellee Fluor Enterprises, Inc. (Fluor). Although plaintiff Grand Acadi-an’s main demand in the underlying case was settled and dismissed, the parties agree that at least the following claims are still pending in the district court: (1) Fluor’s cross-claim against DXHC for contractual indemnity; (2) Fluor’s third party claims for defense and indemnity against The Gray Insurance Company (Gray) and United National Insurance Company (United National); and (3) DXHC’s third party claim for defense and indemnity against United National. Absent Rule 54(b) certification in a multiparty suit, an order of “summary judgment adjudicating the claims of fewer than all the parties is not a final appealable judgment within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291.” Melancon v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 476 F.2d 594, 595 (5th Cir.1973).

We therefore dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. If the trial court enters a new judgment and accompanies it with a proper Rule 54(b) certificate, the second appeal may be submitted on the record and briefs prepared for this appeal as supplemented by the new judgment and certificate. Id.

DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.