Motion to Intervene Appeal

CaseDialysis Clinic, Inc., et al. v. Kevin Medley, et al.

Issue:  Is the denial of a motion to intervene a final order subject to a Rule 3 Appeal as of Right, or a non-final order requiring interlocutory appeal?

Facts:  This case involves a property dispute in which leases were sold to a new party. The buying party filed unlawful entry and detainer actions, and then a motion for summary judgment. The buying party’s predecessor in interest, who was one of the original parties to the lease, filed an intervening complaint. The trial court denied the motion to intervene. The intervening party then filed a Rule 3(a) appeal as of right.

Appellate Decision:  The intermediate court dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appealed order denying intervention was not final. Rather, the intervening party should have filed an interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rules 9 or 10.

Review Granted:  December 7, 2017.

Prediction:  Ben thinks the supreme court will affirm for the reasons stated by the intermediate court. Although there are good reasons to address the denial of a request to intervene before the litigation continues, those can be addressed through the interlocutory appeal procedure.

ABOUT Ben Raybin
Ben Raybin

A Nashville native, Ben began his legal career with Raybin & Weissman after graduating from Vanderbilt University Law School in 2010.

View Profile >
The Best Lawyers in America
Raybin & Weissman, PC Rated by Super Lawyers
Attorney of the month
U.S. News 2017 Best Law Firms