- Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
- Area(s) of Law: Appellate Procedure
- Date Filed: 09-07-2022
- Case #: 21-16563
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Bea, J. for the Court; Thomas, J.; Thomas J.
- Full Text Opinion
Two wage and hour actions, the Morales action and the Caves action, were filed by two different law firms. The Morales action was granted a stay in favor of the Caves action. Subsequently, the firm of the Morales action sent correspondence to class members of the Caves action to join in the Morales action and urged members to opt out of settlement. In response, the district court granted two orders which invalidated the persuaded opt outs from the Caves action. Those persuaded clients appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, arguing that the court has jurisdiction to hear the case’s merits under the collateral order doctrine, and if not, the court should still grant relief by issuing a writ of mandamus. Pursuant to the collateral order doctrine, for a decision to fall within the narrow class of orders satisfying the doctrine three conditions must be met, (1) "conclusiveness," (2) "separateness," and (3) "effective unreviewability." Mohawk Indus., Inc. v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 108 (2009). The Ninth Circuit held it lacked jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine and denied request for mandamus. The court found that under the collateral order doctrine, the orders failed the third requirement of effective unreviewability as the orders can be challenged after a final judgment and therefore lacks jurisdiction. The court reasoned that the case failed the dispositive third factor as the district court’s orders were not clearly erroneous and therefore denied relief for mandamus. DISMISSED.