Also known as: final decisions · final order · final judgment
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A conclusive court determination that resolves the rights of the parties on the merits and leaves nothing further for the court to do except execute the judgment.
Francisco Frost was tried for robbery after an information was filed. The court entered a final order in his favor that necessarily determined he was not the perpetrator. The state later sought to prosecute him for the same robbery involving a second victim. The prior final order bars the new prosecution because it rests on a factual determination inconsistent with guilt.
Floyd Franklin was acquitted of robbing one victim when identity was the sole contested issue. The state then charged him with robbing a second victim during the same incident. The valid and final judgment of acquittal precludes relitigation of the identity question under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Fairfield Bank sued two borrowers in federal district court. The court dismissed all claims against borrower Freya Freeman while claims against the second borrower remained pending. Because the order fully resolved Freeman's rights and liabilities, it qualifies as a final decision appealable under the statute granting appellate jurisdiction over final decisions of district courts.
Fatima Flores sued Franklin Foundry for breach of contract and demanded $75,000 in damages. After the defendant defaulted, the court entered judgment for $120,000 plus injunctive relief never requested in the complaint. The judgment is invalid because a final judgment may not differ in kind or exceed the amount demanded in the pleadings.
Forrest Falconer was convicted after trial of intentionally killing his uncle. The decedent's will left the estate to Falconer. In the subsequent probate proceeding, the final criminal judgment conclusively establishes Falconer as the slayer, barring him from inheriting under the preponderance standard applicable in the civil case.
Fisher Foods was convicted after a guilty plea of a felony punishable by more than one year in prison for mislabeling products. In a later civil suit by a customer, the prosecutor offers the judgment to prove the mislabeling occurred. The final judgment of conviction is admissible to establish that essential fact.
An order qualifies when it ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the district court to do but execute the judgment. Partial dismissals in multi-party cases require an express Rule 54(b) determination of no just reason for delay before they become appealable.
A final order or judgment for the defendant that has not been reversed or vacated bars a later prosecution when it necessarily decided a fact or legal proposition inconsistent with conviction on the new charge.
Yes. A final criminal conviction for the felonious and intentional killing of the decedent conclusively establishes the convicted person as the slayer in the civil proceeding under the preponderance standard.
The judgment must follow a trial or guilty plea (not nolo contendere), involve a crime punishable by death or more than one year in prison, and be offered to prove a fact essential to the judgment. When offered by the prosecutor in a criminal case for a non-impeachment purpose, the judgment must have been entered against the defendant.
…circumstances no warrant for reversal. In California v. Stewart , No. 584, I would dismiss the writ of certiorari for want of a final judgment, 28 U. S. C. § 1257 (3) (1964 ed.); but if the merits are to be reached I would affirm on the ground that the State failed to fulfill its burden, in the absence of a showing that…