Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 316

524us1$86Q 02-17-99 18:23:51 PAGES OPINPGT

Cite as: 524 U. S. 266 (1998)

271

Opinion of the Court

The Court of Appeals nonetheless reached a “no appeal”
It pointed out that
conclusion—but on a different ground.
a “party normally may not appeal [a] decision in its favor.”
Ibid. (citing Electrical Fittings Corp. v. Thomas & Betts Co.,
307 U. S. 241, 242 (1939)). And it said that Forney had ob-
tained a decision in her favor here. Because Forney “may,
on remand, secure all of the relief she seeks,” the court
wrote, she is a “prevailing” party and therefore cannot ap-
peal.

108 F. 3d, at 232–233.

We do not agree. We concede that this Court has held
that a “party who receives all that he has sought generally
is not aggrieved by the judgment affording the relief and
cannot appeal from it.” Deposit Guaranty Nat. Bank v.
Roper, 445 U. S. 326, 333 (1980). But this Court also has
clearly stated that a party is “aggrieved” and ordinarily can
appeal a decision “granting in part and denying in part the
remedy requested.” United States v. Jose, 519 U. S. 54, 56
(1996) (per curiam). And this latter statement determines
the outcome of this case.

Forney’s complaint sought as relief:

“1. That this court reverse and set aside the decision . . .
denying [the] claim for disability beneﬁts;
“2. In the alternative, that this court remand the case
back to the Secretary for proper evaluation of the evi-
dence or a hearing de novo.” App. 37.

The context makes clear that, from Forney’s perspective, the
second “alternative,” which means further delay and risk,
is only half a loaf. Thus, the District Court’s order gives
petitioner some, but not all, of the relief she requested; and
she consequently can appeal the District Court’s order inso-
Indeed, to
far as it denies her the relief she has sought.
hold to the contrary would deny a disability claimant the
right to seek reversal (instead of remand) through a cross-
appeal in cases where the Government itself appeals a re-