Dwight Smith, et al v. City of Johns Creek, GA, et al

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 26-11526
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________

DWIGHT SMITH,
CATHERINE SMITH,
BRYANT SMITH,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus

CITY OF JOHNS CREEK, GA,
a Municipality in the State of Georgia,
ERIC EHRENREICH,
BRADLEYROSENQUIST,
MICHAEL BACON,
JAMES TAIT, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

USCA11 Case: 26-11526 Document: 13-1 Date Filed: 08/14/2026 Page: 1 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 26-11526
____________________
Appeal f rom the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
D.C. Docket No. 1:24-cv-01163-SEG
____________________

Before N
EWSOM, BRASHER, and KIDD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff-Appellants Dwight Smith, Catherine Smith, and
Bryant Smith, all proceeding pro se, appeal from the district court’s
order denying their motion for partial summary judgment as to
their claims against Defendant-Appellee James Tait and granting
Tait’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
The appealed order is not final because it did not end the
litigation on the merits. 28 U.S.C. § 1291; CSX Transp., Inc. v. City
of Garden City, 235 F.3d 1325, 1327 (11th Cir. 2000) (explaining that
a final judgment leaves nothing for the district court to do but
execute the judgment); Supreme Fuels Trading FZE v. Sargeant,
689 F.3d 1244, 1246 (11th Cir. 2012) (explaining that an order
disposing of fewer than all claims is not final). Plaintiff-Appellants’
claims against several other defendants remain pending. The order
is not immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine
because it is effectively reviewable on appeal from a final judgment
and delaying review until then would not imperil a substantial
interest. Acheron Cap., Ltd. v. Mukamal, 22 F.4th 979, 989 (11th Cir.
2022) (explaining that, among other requirements, an order must
be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment to be
appealable under the collateral-order doctrine); Mohawk Indus., Inc.
USCA11 Case: 26-11526 Document: 13-1 Date Filed: 08/14/2026 Page: 2 of 3

26-11526 Opinion of the Court 3
v. Carpenter, 558 U.S. 100, 107 (2009) (explaining that the
collateral-order doctrine applies when delayed review of an order
“would imperil a substantial public interest or some particular
value of a high order” (quotation marks omitted)).
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack
of jurisdiction.
USCA11 Case: 26-11526 Document: 13-1 Date Filed: 08/14/2026 Page: 3 of 3