Appellate Procedure Hypos

Over which of the following district court decisions would a United States Court of Appeals have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291? Why or why not?

  1. Denial of Officer Cue's motion for judgment on the pleadings against Bennaza
  2. Grant of Village of Kenilworth's motion for judgment on the pleadings against Bennaza
  3. Denial of Yamahonda's motion for an order to compel Christianson to submit to a physical examination in the form of a bicycle-riding test in Chicago rush-hour traffic
  4. Denial of Bicycle Messengers' motion for summary judgment on Christianson's ADA claim against it
  5. Grant of Yamahonda's motion for summary judgment on the product liability claim against it
  6. Partial grant of summary judgment against Bennaza on his claim under § 1983 against the Village
  7. Refusal in the final pre-trial order to admit any evidence as to Bennaza's state of intoxication
  8. JMOL against Bennaza on his § 1983 claim against the Village after a jury verdict in his favor

What remedy does Bennaza have if the district judge says, "I think you are a jerk, and I am not going to do anything whatsoever with this case. I'll make no decisions at all?"

What arguments can be made as to the reversibility on appeal of the following decisions?

  1. A jury verdict for Bennaza after Cue testified that Bennaza tried to grab his gun, and expert testimony on behalf of Cue that Cue showed restraint and followed proper procedures. Bennaza repeatedly contradicted himself while testifying and said, "I do not remember," repeatedly when pressed for details.
  2. A decision by the judge to exclude Bennaza's testimony because "No one should believe a witness who sweats profusely, raises his voice to opposing counsel, and looks down when he is testifying."
  3. A jury verdict for Christianson against Yamahonda despite no expert testimony on design of the motorcycle, after a jury instruction that said, "You may find that the motorcyle's lack of leg protection bars was negligent design from the fact that the accident occurred and the nature of the plaintiff's injuries, under the doctrine known as 'res ipsa loquitur.'"
  4. A jury verdict for Bicycle Messengers after Christianson refused during his cross examination by Bicycle Messengers to ride a bicycle around the courtroom and to climb a ladder holding packages in both hands
  5. A jury verdict for Bennaza against Cue after Bennaza testified in accordance with his lawyer-client interview and his roommate, called by the Village, testified that Bennaza told him that he was drunk, didn't remember anything, but was going to "get that Neanderthal cop."