Close X

Dismissal of One of Two Theories in Complaint Under One Cause of Action Not Appealable

Civil Procedure-Rule 54 (b) Language Requires Dismissal of Separate Claim

Robinson v. Kay< __ Ariz. Adv. Rptr. __ 2 CA-CV 2009-0185 (App., Div. II, July 30, 2010) (J. Vasquez)

DISMISSAL OF ONE OF TWO THEORIES SUPPORTING A SINGLE CLAIM DOES NOT SUPPORT 54 (b) LANGUAGE AND COURT OF APPEALS LACKS JURISIDICITON TO DECIDE CASE PIECEMEAL

Plaintiffs filed a suit for prescriptive or implied easement over defendant's property. Defendant received summary judgment on the implied easement theory. Plaintiff appealed with Rule 54 (b) of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure language, claiming the summary judgment constituted an adjudication of a separate and distinct claim and therefore subject to Arizona Court of Appeals jurisdiction.The Arizona Court of Appeals sua sponte determined that an implied easement theory and a prescriptive easement theory are nothing more than two separate theories supporting a single claim and thus Rule 54 (b) language does not make the judgment final and appealable. Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Schmidt & Sethi, PC

Schmidt sethi logo

Schmidt & Sethi, PC is one of the most experienced, successful personal injury law firms in the Tucson area. Established in 1995, our firm has a long history of success, as seen in our many victories.

Contact Us Today

Slider 204

Set up a free case evaluation with our firm today to get answers to all of your personal injury questions. Our Tucson personal injury attorneys truly care for each client and will provide the personal care and attention that you need during this difficult and painful time of your life, which is only part of what sets us apart.