Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 171.54 Acres of Land, More Or Less, in Fairfield, Hocking, Monroe, Morgan,…

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 24a0378n.06
No. 23-3792
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION, LLC,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
171.54 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, IN
FAIRFIELD, HOCKING, MONROE, MORGAN,
MUSKINGUM, NOBLE, PERRY, AND VINTON,
Defendant,
BLACKHAWK LAND AND RESOURCES, LLC,
Defendant-Appellant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF OHIO
OPINION
Before: MOORE, KETHLEDGE, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, filed a condemnation action against
several defendants, including Blackhawk Land and Resources, LLC, to facilitate the construction
of a natural-gas pipeline. After years of litigation, Columbia purported to dismiss its claims against
Blackhawk. Blackhawk then filed a motion for attorneys’ fees, which the district court denied.
Blackhawk appealed. We dismiss the appeal because we lack jurisdiction.
We have jurisdiction over appeals “from all final decisions of the district courts of the
United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1291. “A ‘final decision’ is one that ends the litigation on the merits
and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v.
Central Pension Fund, 571 U.S. 177, 183 (2014).

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 23-3792, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 171.54 Acres of Land
-2-
In cases—like this one—that involve multiple parties and claims, an order can become
final in one of three ways. First, the district court can issue a separate document entering final
judgment as to all parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a). Second, 150 days can elapse from the entry of
the final order in the civil docket (the time at which the district court should have issued a separate
document). Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2)(B). Or third, the district court can enter final judgment as to
fewer than all parties after it determines “there is no just reason for delay.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
None of those things has happened here. The district court issued an “Opinion and Order”
dismissing the “following remaining associated named Defendants,” but did not accompany that
order with a final judgment. And that order came on July 17 of this year—50 days ago. Id. The
court also denied Blackhawk’s motion for attorney’s fees on August 28 of last year, but did not
certify that order under Rule 54(b). Given all those omissions, we lack jurisdiction to hear
Blackhawk’s appeal until the district court enters a final judgment either ending the litigation
entirely or ending it as to Blackhawk.
We dismiss the appeal.

-- 2 of 2 --