Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
14. Should the court grant the landlord's motion for a partial final judgment?
After discovery, the landlord and the tenant filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the damage to the premises and security deposit claims. The court granted summary judgment for the landlord on both claims. The parties' respective claims for slander were set for trial. The landlord requested the district court immediately enter a final judgment as to the damages and security deposit claims so the landlord could collect the money due. The tenant opposed this request, providing evidence of the hardship she would suffer if she had to pay the full amount of the damages immediately when that amount might be reduced by the decisions on the respective claims for slander.
A commercial landlord sued his former tenant in federal court, asserting that the tenant caused substantial damage to the leased premises, resulting in $80,000 worth of damages. The landlord also asserted a claim for slander due to allegedly defamatory remarks that the tenant made to prospective future tenants. The tenant counterclaimed for slander, alleging the landlord made it difficult for the tenant to find a suitable new location for its operations. The tenant also sought recovery of her security deposit.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
B is correct. The court should not grant the landlord's motion for a partial final judgment because the requirement that there be «no just reason for delay» has not been met. In fact, there are multiple reasons for delaying the entry of the final judgment. The landlord successfully obtained a summary judgment on the claim for damages and the security deposit claim and is asking that the tenant be ordered to pay the entire sum of the damages and that the court immediately dispose of the security deposit claim in his favor. However, if the court were to grant the landlord's motion and enter final judgment on both claims now, the tenant would suffer significant hardship and be forced to appeal the partial judgment without including the slander claim, which has not been adjudicated and must go through the trial phase. Courts dislike piecemeal appeals and will not enter partial judgments a piecemeal appeal is likely to occur.
A is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with incorrect legal reasoning. Although the court should not grant the landlord's motion, it is not because final judgment cannot be entered until all claims have been fully adjudicated. FRCP 54(b) allows for entry of a final judgment on fewer than all of the claims if the court finds there is no just reason for delaying. Because there are just reasons for delay, the court should nevertheless still deny the landlord's motion.
C is incorrect. The fact that the claims have been fully heard and resolved on the merits does not necessarily mean that the court should grant the motion to enter partial final judgments. The court should only do so if there is no just reason for delay, but there are multiple reasons for delay here, as explained above.
D is incorrect. As explained above, multiple reasons exist as to why the court should delay entry of a final judgment on fewer than all of the claims, including the tenant's hardship and the policy disfavoring piecemeal appeals.