Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-01363/USCOURTS-ca10-15-01363-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 

---

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

COLORADO CASUALTY INSURANCE 

COMPANY, a New Hampshire 

corporation,

 Plaintiff Counterclaim

 Defendant - Appellee, 

v.

INFINITY LAND CORPORATION, a 

dissolved Colorado corporation; PAUL 

HOWARD, 

 Defendants Counterclaimants 

 Appellants, 

and

H2 LAND CO, LLC, a dissolved Colorado 

limited liability company; HOWARD 

FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a 

dissolved Colorado limited liability 

company; JONATHAN HOWARD, 

 Defendants Counterclaimants, 

and 

KF 103 CV, LLC, a Colorado limited 

Liability company; WILLIAM 

MERCHANT; MAUREEN M. 

MERCHANT; MARILYN J. HOWELL, as 

Trustee of the MARILYN J. HOWELL 

TRUST; C. ARLENE NANCE; WILLIAM 

PECK; DARRELL H. OLIVER; KELLY 

ANN OLIVER; SUSAN HANSON,

 Defendants.

No. 15-1363

(D.C. No. 1:12-CV-02748-WYD-NYW)

(D. Colo.)

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 29, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-1363 Document: 01019612050 Date Filed: 04/29/2016 Page: 1 
2

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, LUCERO, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

This matter is before us on Appellants’ Status Report, filed April 1, 2016, and 

their Responses to the court’s orders of April 4, 2016 and April 13, 2016. Appellants 

suggest that the district court’s order granting their motion for relief pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 60(b)(6) rendered this court without appellate jurisdiction due to the lack of an 

appealable final order in the underlying action.

We agree. By partially reversing its decision with regard to Appellee’s duty to 

defend Appellants in state court litigation, the district court revived Appellants’ 

counterclaims. As a result, there is no final judgment in the underlying action. Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 54(b) (providing that an order adjudicating fewer than all claims, including 

counterclaims, is not a final order). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider this 

appeal. 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Jane K. Castro

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 15-1363 Document: 01019612050 Date Filed: 04/29/2016 Page: 2