Marshall v. Williams

OPINION

CONTRERAS, Presiding Judge.

We have determined on our own motion following this court’s routine jurisdictional review,1 that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of adjudication of one whole claim notwithstanding the inclusion of a rule 54(b)2 determination of finality in the judgment from which appeal is taken. This case is illustrative of a recurring species of attempted appeals3 and we therefore deem a published opinion appropriate.

By amended complaint filed June 7,1979, appellants Marshall, Cosseboom and Ghosts brought a suit stated in eight “causes of action” against the appellee…