Court Opinion

ID: 9891422
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-18 16:00:43.835428+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:20.719933
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 23-11212    Document: 48-1      Date Filed: 10/18/2023   Page: 1 of 4

                                                   [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                    In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 23-11212
                           Non-Argument Calendar
                          ____________________

       MAURA O'NEILL,
       a.k.a. Marua Anne O'Neill,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
       versus
       LENOX HILL HOSPITAL,

                                                             Defendant,

       NYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER,
       NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN QUEENS,
       GRADY HEALTH SYSTEM,
       MOUNT SINAI BETH ISRAEL,
       NORTHSIDE HOSPITAL FORSYTH,
USCA11 Case: 23-11212     Document: 48-1      Date Filed: 10/18/2023    Page: 2 of 4

       2                      Opinion of the Court                23-11212

       COLLEGE PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT,

                                                    Defendants-Appellees.

                            ____________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Northern District of Georgia
                     D.C. Docket No. 1:22-cv-00011-SEG
                           ____________________

       Before WILSON, JILL PRYOR, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               Upon our review of the record and the parties’ responses to
       the jurisdictional question, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of ju-
       risdiction.
               Maura O’Neill appeals from the district court’s March 14,
       2023 order that, among other things, dismissed defendants NYU
       Langone Medical Center, New York Presbyterian-Queens,
       Northside Hospital Forsyth, and College Park Police Department
       from the action. The order also denied O’Neill’s requests that the
       district court enter a permanent injunction requiring defendants to
       provide medical records. O’Neill argues that the denial of a perma-
       nent injunction was a final ruling and, even if not, is an appealable
       interlocutory ruling.
USCA11 Case: 23-11212      Document: 48-1      Date Filed: 10/18/2023     Page: 3 of 4

       23-11212               Opinion of the Court                          3

               The district court’s order was not a final decision because
       O’Neill’s claims against Grady Health System and Mount Sinai
       Beth Israel remain pending. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Supreme Fuels
       Trading FZE v. Sargeant, 689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012). The
       district court did not enter judgment under Federal Rule of Civil
       Procedure 54(b) or otherwise. The order is thus appealable now
       only if one of the limited provisions for interlocutory appeals ap-
       plies.
               The district court’s denial of an injunction is not appealable
       under the collateral order doctrine because the district court noted
       that O’Neill could request the medical records from the defendants
       if the case proceeds to discovery and O’Neill has not established
       that the court’s order is effectively unreviewable on appeal from a
       final judgment. See Freyre v. Chronister, 910 F.3d 1371, 1377 (11th
       Cir. 2018) (providing that a district court order that “contemplates
       further substantive proceedings in a case is not final and appeala-
       ble”); Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d 1247, 1253 (11th Cir. 2014) (ex-
       plaining that an order is appealable under the collateral order doc-
       trine if it, inter alia, would be effectively unreviewable on appeal
       from a final judgment); see also Drummond Co. v. Collingsworth,
       816 F.3d 1319, 1322 (11th Cir. 2016) (“Discovery orders are ordinar-
       ily not final orders that are immediately appealable.”). And the de-
       nial is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) because the in-
       junctions, if entered, would not provide any of the substantive re-
       lief sought in the complaint, are distinct from O’Neill’s claims
       against the defendants, and would essentially affect pretrial discov-
       ery procedures. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1); Alabama v. U.S. Army
USCA11 Case: 23-11212     Document: 48-1      Date Filed: 10/18/2023    Page: 4 of 4

       4                      Opinion of the Court                23-11212

       Corps. of Eng’rs, 424 F.3d 1117, 1127-29 (11th Cir. 2005); Switz.
       Cheese Ass’n v. E. Horne’s Mkt., Inc., 385 U.S. 23, 24-25 (1966). Ac-
       cordingly, we lack jurisdiction over this premature appeal.