Appealability and review - Scope of review for judge and jury

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to identify which orders are appealable, distinguish between final judgments and interlocutory orders, and apply the correct standards of review for factual and legal findings by judges and juries. You will also understand how appellate courts review trial court decisions and recognize the limits of appellate review, all of which are necessary for MBE success.

MBE Syllabus

For MBE, you are required to understand the rules governing appealability and the scope of appellate review in federal civil procedure. This article covers:

• The final judgment rule and exceptions allowing interlocutory appeals.
• The availability and limits of interlocutory review (including injunctions and collateral orders).
• The standards of review for legal rulings, factual findings, and discretionary decisions.
• The distinction between review of judge and jury determinations.
• The effect of errors and the harmless error doctrine.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Which of the following is generally required for an order to be immediately appealable in federal court?
   1. The order must be a final judgment resolving all claims as to all parties.
   2. The order must be certified by the trial judge as important.
   3. The order must involve a constitutional issue.
   4. The order must be a denial of summary judgment.
2. When reviewing a trial judge’s findings of fact after a bench trial, the appellate court will:
   1. Substitute its own judgment for the trial judge’s.
   2. Review for clear error and give deference to the trial judge.
   3. Review de novo.
   4. Reverse unless the findings are unanimous.
3. Which standard of review applies to a trial court’s discretionary decision to admit or exclude evidence?
   1. De novo.
   2. Abuse of discretion.
   3. Clearly erroneous.
   4. Substantial evidence.
4. An interlocutory appeal is most likely to be available in which scenario?
   1. Denial of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
   2. Grant or denial of a preliminary injunction.
   3. Entry of a scheduling order.
   4. Ruling on a discovery dispute.

Introduction

Appealability and the scope of appellate review are central to federal civil procedure on the MBE. Not every trial court order can be appealed immediately. Understanding when an order is appealable and how appellate courts review trial and jury decisions is essential for exam questions on post-trial procedure.

Final Judgment Rule

Federal appellate courts generally have jurisdiction only over final judgments—orders that resolve all claims as to all parties. This is known as the final judgment rule.

Key Term: Final Judgment
A decision that ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the trial court to do but execute the judgment.

Exceptions: Interlocutory Appeals

Some non-final orders may be appealed immediately under specific exceptions. These include:

• Orders granting, denying, or modifying injunctions.
• Certain collateral orders that resolve important issues separate from the merits and are effectively unreviewable after final judgment.
• Orders certified by the trial court and accepted by the appellate court as involving a controlling question of law with substantial grounds for difference of opinion.

Key Term: Interlocutory Appeal
An appeal taken before the final judgment, permitted only in specific circumstances such as injunctions or collateral orders.

Scope of Review: Judge and Jury

Appellate courts use different standards when reviewing trial court decisions:

Legal Rulings

Questions of law (e.g., interpretation of statutes or rules) are reviewed de novo. The appellate court gives no deference to the trial court’s legal conclusions.

Key Term: De Novo Review
Appellate review without deference; the appellate court decides the issue as if it were being considered for the first time.

Factual Findings

• Bench Trials: The trial judge’s findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. The appellate court will not overturn such findings unless left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.
• Jury Trials: The jury’s verdict is reviewed to determine if there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to reach its conclusion. The appellate court does not reweigh evidence or assess witness credibility.

Key Term: Clearly Erroneous Standard
The standard for reviewing a trial judge’s factual findings; reversal only if a clear mistake is shown.

Key Term: Substantial Evidence Standard
The standard for reviewing a jury’s verdict; the verdict stands if supported by substantial evidence.

Discretionary Decisions

Rulings committed to the trial court’s discretion (e.g., evidentiary rulings, granting or denying a new trial) are reviewed for abuse of discretion. The appellate court will reverse only if the decision was arbitrary, unreasonable, or not based on sound judgment.

Key Term: Abuse of Discretion
A standard of review for discretionary trial court decisions; reversal only if the decision was unreasonable or arbitrary.

Harmless Error Doctrine

Even if the appellate court finds that the trial court made an error, it will not reverse unless the error affected a party’s substantial rights or the outcome of the case.

Key Term: Harmless Error
An error that does not affect the outcome or substantial rights; does not warrant reversal on appeal.

Worked Example 1.1

A federal district court, after a bench trial, finds for the plaintiff and enters judgment. The defendant appeals, arguing that the trial judge’s factual findings were wrong. What standard will the appellate court apply?

Answer: The appellate court will review the trial judge’s factual findings for clear error, giving deference to the trial judge’s opportunity to assess witness credibility.

Worked Example 1.2

A party loses a motion for summary judgment and wants to appeal immediately. Is this order appealable?

Answer: No. Denial of summary judgment is not a final judgment and is not immediately appealable unless certified under a statutory exception, which is rare.

Worked Example 1.3

A trial judge excludes certain evidence over objection. On appeal, the losing party claims this was error. What standard applies?

Answer: The appellate court will review the evidentiary ruling for abuse of discretion.

Exam Warning

The most common MBE trap is confusing the standard of review for legal questions (de novo) with that for factual findings (clearly erroneous or substantial evidence). Always identify the type of issue before selecting the standard.

Revision Tip

Remember: Only final judgments are appealable as of right. Interlocutory appeals are rare and limited to specific categories such as injunctions or collateral orders.

Summary

• Most appeals require a final judgment.
• Interlocutory appeals are allowed only in narrow circumstances.
• Legal rulings: de novo review.
• Factual findings (judge): clearly erroneous.
• Jury verdicts: substantial evidence standard.
• Discretionary decisions: abuse of discretion.
• Errors must be harmful to warrant reversal.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• Final judgment rule: appeals generally require a final decision resolving all claims as to all parties.
• Interlocutory appeals are permitted only for injunctions, collateral orders, or certified questions.
• Legal questions are reviewed de novo; no deference to the trial court.
• Factual findings by a judge are reviewed for clear error; jury verdicts stand if supported by substantial evidence.
• Discretionary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
• Harmless error doctrine: not all errors require reversal.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Final Judgment
• Interlocutory Appeal
• De Novo Review
• Clearly Erroneous Standard
• Substantial Evidence Standard
• Abuse of Discretion
• Harmless Error