Opinion
Civil No. 02-43-HA.
April 21, 2004
ORDER
Plaintiff filed this action in January 2002 alleging violations of his civil rights. On March 25, 2003, plaintiff moved for partial summary judgment. On April 7, 2003, defendants Baker County, Sharon Bass, and Tammy Bloomer (Baker County defendants) filed a motion for cross-summary judgment. On April 17, 2003, defendants Clackamas County, Lori Vicars, and Clara Stoner (Clackamas County defendants) filed a motion for cross-summary judgment.
On October 22, 2003, the court issued an Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's motion; granting Baker County defendants' motion; and denying Clackamas County defendants' motion. On March 11, 2004, Baker County defendants filed a Motion for Entry of Judgment (Doc. #108). This motion is now before the court.
The Baker County defendants seek an entry of judgment in their favor as to all claims asserted against them because they have been dismissed from this case pursuant to the court's order of summary judgment. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b), in a multi-party litigation, the district "court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay. . . ."
The court finds that a final judgment on the Baker County defendants' claims at this time is premature as it may unnecessarily result in separate appeals. Moreover, the Baker County defendants have failed to show that the interests of justice and fairness favor the immediate entry of final judgment in their favor. See Alcan Aluminum Corp. v. Carlsberg Fin. Corp., 689 F.2d 815, 816 (9th Cir. 1982) (recognizing that judgments under Rule 54(b) should be reserved for the "case in which the costs and risks of multiplying the number of proceedings and of overcrowding the appellate docket are outbalanced by pressing needs of the litigants for an early and separate judgment as to some claims or parties.") (citation omitted). CONCLUSION
Baker County defendants' Motion for Entry of Judgment (Doc. #108) is hereby DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.