Opinion ID: 793983
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Qualified Immunity Appeals as Interlocutory Appeals

Text: 84 The appeal of a denial of qualified immunity is an interlocutory appeal that this Court hears as a final decision of the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 pursuant to the collateral order doctrine. See Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 525-27, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985). If the appeal fails the requirements of the collateral order doctrine, this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Most denials of summary judgment are nonfinal orders which cannot be appealed under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Id. Only to the extent that a summary judgment order denies qualified immunity based on a pure issue of law may this Court entertain an interlocutory appeal. A defendant who is denied qualified immunity may file an interlocutory appeal with this Court only if that appeal involves the abstract or pure legal issue of whether the facts alleged by the plaintiff constitute a violation of clearly established law. Berryman v. Rieger, 150 F.3d 561, 563 (6th Cir.1998) (citations omitted). 85 The Supreme Court has clearly held that a district court's determination that there exists a triable issue of fact cannot be appealed on an interlocutory basis, even when that finding arises in the context of an assertion of qualified immunity. See Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304, 313, 115 S.Ct. 2151, 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995) ([A] defendant, entitled to invoke a qualified immunity defense, may not appeal a district court's summary judgment order insofar as that order determines whether or not the pretrial record sets forth a `genuine' issue of fact for trial.) The Supreme Court therefore held that 28 U.S.C. § 1291 could not serve as the basis for appellate jurisdiction for appeals from qualified immunity denials to the extent that those appeals took issue with the district court's determination that there existed a genuine issue of fact for trial. Johnson, 515 U.S. at 313, 115 S.Ct. 2151. 5 To the extent that an appellant on an interlocutory appeal argues issues of fact and law on appeal, this Court will only entertain pure issues of law. To be clear, an appellant's contention that the district court erred in finding a genuine issue of fact for trial is not the type of legal question which we may entertain on an interlocutory basis. Id. To do so would interject appellate review into a district court's determination that the evidence is sufficient for trial, a nonfinal adjudication for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1291 that is indistinguishable from all other, nonappealable, denials of summary judgment. 86