916 F.2d 716
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Vernon GREGOROFF, Luanne Gregoroff, husband and wife, and
Luanne Gregoroff as Guardian Ad Litem for Brenda
Lee Gregoroff, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
FIRST BANK (N.A.)--WESTERN MONTANA MISSOULA, a nationally
chartered bank, Rangitsch Brothers Mobile Homes Limited
Partnership, a Montana Partnership and predecessor in
interest to Rangitsch Brothers Mobile Homes Limited
Partnership, Rangitsch Brothers, a fictitious name for an
entity doing business in Montana, R.D. Rangitsch,
individually and as a partner in Rangitsch Brothers Mobile
Homes, R.J. Rangitsch, individually and as a partner in
Rangitsch Brothers Mobile Homes, Butte-Silver Bow, a
political subdivision of the State of Montana, Robert
Butorovich, Sheriff of Butte-Silver Bow, John Doe I-VIII,
law enforcement officials employed by Butte-Silver Bow,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 89-35658.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted July 13, 1990.
Decided Oct. 17, 1990.
Before FLETCHER, FERGUSON and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
The plaintiffs appeal the dismissal of their 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action for failure to state a claim regarding the repossession of their trailer and seizure of their personal property.
The plaintiffs filed the action against several defendants, namely, First Bank; several Rangitsch entities and personalities; the town of Butte-Silver Bow; Robert Butorovich, Sheriff of Butte-Silver Bow; and eight John Does, who are law enforcement officers of Butte-Silver Bow.
Rangitsch and First Bank filed a motion to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Butte-Silver Bow, the Sheriff, and the John Doe deputies filed answers.
The district court granted the motion to dismiss, and it is from that dismissal that the plaintiffs appeal.
The appeal must be dismissed as the appeal is not from a final judgment. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b), an order adjudicating the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties is not final unless the district court makes an express determination that there is no just cause for delay and expressly directs the entry of judgment. Baker v. Limber, 647 F.2d 912, 916 (9th Cir.1981).
It is clear from the record that the dismissal order of the district court refers and is granted only as to defendant First Bank and the various Rangitsch defendants. The action was not dismissed as to all the other defendants.
The district court shall proceed to adjudicate the rights and liabilities of the plaintiffs and the remaining defendants, namely, Butte-Silver Bow, the Sheriff of Butte-Silver Bow, and the eight John Does.
As the appeal is dismissed for lack of a final judgment, we express no opinion on the merits of the purported appeal before us. When a final judgment is entered by the district court, then the plaintiffs may appeal the dismissal of First Bank and the Rangitsch defendants.
Each party shall bear its costs.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
APPEAL DISMISSED.