Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-15-02177/USCOURTS-ca10-15-02177-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Board of Education for the Las Vegas City Schools
Appellant
Las Vegas City Schools
Not Party
R. M-G
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

R. M-G., as parent and next friend for 

A.R., a minor child, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR THE 

LAS VEGAS CITY SCHOOLS, 

 Defendant.

--------------------

A.R., through his mother and next friend, 

R. M-G, and R. M-G,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

LAS VEGAS CITY SCHOOLS; BOARD 

OF EDUCATION FOR THE LAS VEGAS 

CITY SCHOOLS; SHERYL MCNELLIS 

MARTINEZ, in her official capacity as 

Superintendent of the Las Vegas City 

Schools, and her in individual capacity; 

RICHARD ROMERO; LESLIE DAMON; 

LORENA CASTRO-GARCIA, in their 

individual capacities,

 Defendants.

--------------------

BOARD OF EDUCATION FOR THE 

LAS VEGAS CITY SCHOOLS,

No. 15-2177

(D.C. No. 1:13-CV-00350-KBM-KK)

(D.C. No. 1:13-CV-00720-KBM-KK)

(D.C. No. 1:13-CV-00755-KBM-KK)

(D. N.M.)

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 11, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 15-2177 Document: 01019600489 Date Filed: 04/11/2016 Page: 1 
2

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

R. M-G, as parent and next friend of minor 

child A.R., 

 Defendant - Appellee.

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, MATHESON, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

This appeal arises out of three consolidated district court cases. The Board of 

Education for the Las Vegas City Schools (the School District) seeks to appeal the district 

court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment on the claims it asserted in one of the 

consolidated cases, No. 13-CV-755-KBM-KK. Claims asserted in another of the 

consolidated cases, No. 13-CV-720-KBM-KK, remain pending. 

Because the district court’s summary judgment ruling did not dispose of all the 

claims in the consolidated action, it does not operate as a final, appealable judgment 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, unless the district court certifies its decision as final pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Trinity Broadcasting Corp. v. Eller, 827 F.2d 

673, 675 (10th Cir. 1987). The district court has denied the School District’s motion for 

a Rule 54(b) certification, and that denial is not immediately appealable. See Makuc v. 

Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 692 F.2d 172, 173-74 (1st Cir. 1982) (noting that the denial 

of a Rule 54(b) certification is interlocutory and not immediately appealable).

Appellate Case: 15-2177 Document: 01019600489 Date Filed: 04/11/2016 Page: 2 
3

As the district court has not entered a final decision in the consolidated action, we 

lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

by: Jane K. Castro

 Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 15-2177 Document: 01019600489 Date Filed: 04/11/2016 Page: 3