Document: 66 L.Ed.2d 571 101 S.Ct. 669 449 U.S. 368 FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Petitioner,v.John C. RISJORD. No. 79-1420. Argued Nov. 12, 1980. Decided Jan. 13, 1981. Syllabus Respondent is lead counsel for the plaintiffs in four consolidated product-liability suits Federal District Court against petitioner and other manufacturers. Petitioner moved to disqualify respondent from further representation of because an alleged conflict interest arising fact that petitioner's liability insurer was also occasional client respondent's law firm. argued would give him incentive structure plaintiffs' claims relief so as enable avoid any liability, thus increasing own potential liability. In accordance with Court's order, obtained consent both his continuing representation, court then allowed continue plaintiffs. filed a notice appeal pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which vests courts appeals "jurisdiction all final decisions district . except where direct review may be had Supreme Court." The Appeals held orders denying disqualification motions were not immediately appealable under but it overruling prior cases, made its decision prospective only and, on merits, affirmed order permitting representing Held: 1. Orders opposing party's civil case are 1291. Such does fall within "collateral order" exception Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 541, 69 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528, requirement 1291 must await judgment merits underlying litigation. has no showing, required doctrine orders," effectively unreviewable merits. propriety court's denial motion will often difficult assess until impact litigation evaluated, normally after judgment, should conclude trial ended prejudicial error, retain usual authority vacate appealed new trial. Pp. 373-378. 2. Appeals, properly concluding erred reaching order. finality jurisdictional nature. If appellate finds party seeks statute, inquiry over. A lacks discretion consider over without jurisdiction, ruling never only. 379-380. 8 Cir., 612 F.2d 377, vacated remanded. Harvey M. Grossman, Los Angeles, Cal., petitioner. John R. Gibson, Kansas City, Mo., respondent. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 This presents question whether take appeal, 1291,1 case. United States Eighth Circuit such appealable, therefore reached challenged We hold we remand instructions dismissed lack jurisdiction. 2 * seeking damages manufacturers multipiece truck tire rims injuries caused by defects their products.2 complaints charge defendants various negligent, willful, or intentional failures correct warn supposed rims. Plaintiffs seek compensatory exemplary damages. App. 6-72. 3 at relevant times insured Home Insurance Co. (Home) contract providing responsible some types beyond minimum "deductible" amount. firm.3 Based these facts, May 1979 clear way turn, argued, could increase advised course policy cover neither award willful acts nor punitive damages.4 entered pretrial requiring terminate plaintiffs5 unless consented representation.6 Id., 157, 160. 4 affidavit he stated informed objection them both. He supporting affidavits executed representative Home. Because satisfied requirements able objected permit if met statedconditions, 1291.7 5 Although did hear oral argument decided en banc plaintiffs.8 re Multi-Piece Rim Products Liability, 377 (1980). Before considering reconsidered overruled holding reasoned collateral-order 1528 (1949), allows judgment. reach "[i]n fairness appellant instant case," future, have main proceeding.9 F.2d, 378-379. granted certiorari, 446 934, 100 2150, 64 786 (1980), resolve among Circuits appealability question.10 II 6 Under vested consistently interpreted this language indicating section there been "a 'ends leaves nothing do execute judgment.' " Coopers s Lybrand Livesay, 437 463, 467, 98 2454, 2457, 57 351 (1978), quoting Catlin States, 324 229, 233, 65 631, 633, 89 911 (1945). rule, ordinarily raise error single following serves number important purposes. It emphasizes deference owe judge individual initially called upon decide many questions occur Permitting piecemeal undermine independence judge, well special role plays our judicial system. addition, rule sensible "avoid[ing] obstruction just come harassment cost succession separate rulings rise, initiation entry judgment." Cobbledick 309 323, 325, 60 540, 84 783 (1940). See DiBella 369 121, 124, 82 654, 656, 7 614 (1962). purpose promoting efficient administration. Eisen Carlisle Jacquelin, 417 156, 170, 94 2140, 2149, 40 732 (1974). Our recognized, however, narrow supra, "small class" end nevertheless shareholder's derivative action refused apply state statute plaintiff suit post security costs. defendant awaiting ordered require costs posted. assumed jurisdiction constituted determination claim "separable from, collateral to," proceeding, "too denied review," independent cause itself consideration deferred whole adjudicated." 546, 1225. establish law; rather, continued tradition giving "practical rather than technical construction." Ibid. See, e. g., River Rouge Improvement Co., 269 411, 413-414, 46 144, 70 339 (1926); Bronson LaCrosse Milwaukee 67 524-531, Black 524, 530-531, 17 347 (1863); Forgay Conrad, 47 201, 203, How. 12 404 (1848); Whiting Bank 38 6, 15, 13 Pet. 10 33 (1839). recently defined limited class orders" terms: "[T]he conclusively determine disputed question, issue completely action, 468, 2457 (footnote omitted). Abney 431 651, 658, 97 2034, 2039, 52 651 (1977). petition arises time filed,11 falls doctrine. not, conclusion denials orders."12 agree subject resolution 9 An meets first part test. "conclusively determine[s] question," permitted representation. assume, although decide, "resolve[s] action," second Nevertheless, unable demonstrate "effectively judgment" meaning cases. attempting show why alleges immediate irreparable harm. true "be construed crucial lost potentially suffered," Mathews Eldridge, 424 319, 331, n. 11, 96 893, 901, 18 (1976). support assertion irreparably harmed, hints "the possibility proceedings indelibly stamped shaped fruits breach confidence omissions prompted divided loyalty," Brief effect tainted proceeding frustrating public policy," id., 16. But fails supply concrete example indelible stamp taint warns. ground urged might shape products-liability burden much more before considered unreviewable" absent appeal. 11 To constitute complete, formal court, rejection," 659, 2040, claimed right "where render impossible whatsoever," Ryan, 402 530, 533, 91 1580, 1582, 29 85 (1971). Thus criminal trials when about subjected forbidden double jeopardy, violation constitutional bail, Stack Boyle, 342 1, 72 (1951) those situations, like posting involved Cohen, "each asserted legal practical value destroyed vindicated trial." MacDonald, 435 850, 860, 1547, 1552, 56 (1978). By contrast, generally discovery orders, see, supra; supra. rationale rare cure erroneous defy contempt citation him, challenge ruling. 327, 542. rejected "may fairly assessed" trial, involving "considerations 'enmeshed factual issues comprising plaintiff's action.' U.S., 469, S.Ct., 2458, Mercantile National Langdeau, 371 555, 558, 83 520, 522, 523 (1963). refusing plainly large indeed reviewable smaller not. attorney turns peculiar situation hand, embodying rarely, ever, represent rejection fundamental cannot reviewed us, showing opportunity meaningful perish permitted. On contrary, That remedy seems adequate concerns possible injury ultimately prove founded. As Second observed, harm even "diffe[r] significant resulting interlocutory erroneous, work-product recusal judge." Armstrong McAlpin, 625 433, 438 cert. pending, 80-431. "on mere they erroneous." Will 389 90, 98, 88 269, 275, 19 305 (1967). wholesale unjustified waste scarce resources, transform carved out into license broad disregard imposed Congress decline do.13 III litigation.14 Insofar conclusion, correct. contrary precedent Circuit, went from. approach, overlooks embodied thus, definition, merits.15 Con sequently, vacated, remanded dismiss want 133, 661. 14 So ordered. 15 REHNQUIST, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, concurring result. 16 I result analysis far answer dispositive issue. Since unnecessary so, state, does, ante, 375-376: "An 'collateral order' 'conclusively question,' representation." Jackson stressed disposition right" specifically distinguished matter "subject reconsideration time." 546-547, Just certification doctrine, revision 2458. reconsider highly 858-859, 1551-1552, indictment speedy grounds noted necessitated careful assessment particular facts case, "[t]he indicate trial—when prejudice can better gauged—would denied." me, determines question. remains free time. 439 (CA2 1980) (en banc), 80-431; 451 (Van Graafeiland, J., dissenting part); Fleischer Phillips, 264 515, 516-517 (CA2), denied, 359 1002, 79 1139, 1030 (1959). recognizes possibility, 378-379, 13. And doing being abstractly inconsistent prong test satisfied. very merely theoretical. Petitioner's advance theories absolve insurer, strenuously others. discern become clearer progresses actually present theories. later point proceedings—"when gauged"—will denied. 20 what seem me totally probably incorrect statements minor opinion, concur Title provides part: "The shall Pursuant 1407, Judicial Panel Multidistrict Litigation rim Western Missouri. 73. firm included list clients Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory occasionally represented matters unrelated At motion, defending five carriers certain fire insurance policies. pay retainer. April sent letters containing similar advice suits. actions alternative, matter. 3, based existed interpretation Disciplinary Rule 5-105 Code Professional Responsibility, most adopted verbatim local court. prohibits lawyer "continu[ing] multiple employment exercise professional behalf likely adversely affected another client" "it obvious adequately each consents ." agreed dual affect 'exercise .' 160, International Business Machines Corp. Levin, 579 271, 280 (CA3 1978). "either comply certified 1292(b), "When making otherwise section, involves controlling substantial difference materially ultimate termination litigation, writing thereupon, discretion, taken Neither elected proceed 1292(b). chose After filing allegedly failing subsequently withdrawn. granting 378. presented petition, express it. view During pendency federal-court Home, charging consenting suits, breached fiduciary duty 217. argument, Tr. Oral Arg. 7-8. addition currently now follow appealable. Continental Investment 637 (CA1 1980); 1980), 80-431, Silver Chrysler Plymouth, Inc. Motors 496 800 1974); Melamed ITT Baking 592 290 (CA6 1979) (Melamed II), 534 1976) I); Community Broadcasting Boston, FCC, 178 U.S.App.D.C. 256, 546 1022 (1976); Cord Smith, 338 516 (CA9 1964). Five Westinghouse Electric Kerr-McGee 580 1311 (CA7 1978); MacKethan Peat, Marwick, Mitchell 557 395 (CA4 1977); Kroungold Triester, 521 763 1975); Fullmer Harper, 517 (CA10 Uniweld Products, Union Carbide 385 992 (CA5 1967), 390 921, 853, 980 (1968). Counsel was, time, stage. 35-36. 10, situations damaged forced wait securing counsel, necessary, create general orders. proper circumstances, moving sanctions short disqualification, protective limiting counsel's ability disclose act purportedly confidential information. additional develop ask decision. Ultimately, dissatisfied absolutely determined harmed irreparably, see 7, exceptional circumstances designed, writ mandamus available. 7; U.S.App.D.C., 262, 1028. Comment, Appealability Denying Motions Disqualification Courts, 45 U.Chi.L.Rev. 450, 468-480 need concerned availability extraordinary procedures colorable suffer outcome appealing greater suffered litigant challenging considers erroneous. brief amicus curiae, standing attack light occasion address Two Courts similarly disputes them. 441-442 (citing provide guidance resources); II, 295 (earlier established case). extent rationales cases allow respectfully disagree.

Category: 8