§ 3.3.1.6.1 Rule 54(b) Findings Required.

• Jurisdiction: Arizona

§ 3.3.1.6.1 Rule 54(b) Findings Required. Judgments entered as to fewer than all claims or all parties in actions involving multiple claims or multiple parties may be appealed, but only upon an express determination that there is no reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. See R. Civ. P. 54(b); Rogers v. Salt River Project Agric. Improvement & Power Dist., 110 Ariz. 279, 280, 517 P.2d 1275, 1276 (1974) (interim orders not appealable); Pepsi-Cola Metro. Bottling Co. v. Romley, 118 Ariz. 565, 568, 578 P.2d 994, 997 (App. 1978) (order not appealable where no Rule 54(b) findings are made); Tucson Telco Fed. Credit Union v. Bowser, 6 Ariz. App. 10, 12, 429 P.2d 502, 504 (1967).

The court of appeals has held it had jurisdiction of an appeal that did not dispose of all claims by all parties and did not contain Rule 54(b) language, where a final judgment was later entered before the appeal was considered, meaning the earlier judgment then became final. See Turner v. City of Flagstaff, 226 Ariz. 341, 342 n.2, ¶ 4, 247 P.3d 1011, 1012 n.2 (App. 2011); State ex rel. Ariz. Structural Pest Control Comm’n v. Taylor, 223 Ariz. 486, 487, ¶ 4, 224 P.3d 983, 984 (App. 2010) (prior judgment became appealable when judgment was entered against another defendant).

However, on plaintiffs’ appeal from a trial court’s dismissal of their claims against one defendant on summary judgment, the court of appeals held it lacked jurisdiction to consider any challenges to dismissal of certain of plaintiffs’ claims against another defendant. The trial court’s partial ruling in favor of the other defendant was not ripe for appeal since it did not contain a Rule 54(b) certification. See Belen Loan Investors, L.L.C. v. Bradley, 231 Ariz. 448, 451 n.5, ¶ 4, 296 P.3d 983, 984 n.5 (App. 2012).

The fact that an order or judgment contains Rule 54(b) language does not make it final and appealable. The certification also must be substantively warranted. See Southwest Gas Corp. v. Irwin ex rel. Cty., 229 Ariz. 198, 203, ¶ 14, 273 P.3d 650, 655 (App. 2012). For example, a trial court minute entry granting a school district’s request for an order of immediate possession of disputed property and a related order containing Rule 54(b) findings did not constitute a final judgment and thus was not directly appealable where the statute that afforded relief from an immediate possession order anticipated that additional proceedings would be held after entry of an order of possession and before entry of...