Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC - Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction

11th Circuit Published Opinions (CourtListener)

Filed March 24th, 2026

Detected March 24th, 2026

Summary

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal of Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC for lack of jurisdiction. The court found the district court's order was not final as claims against three defendants remained pending, and the order was not certified for immediate appeal.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed the appeal in Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC, docket number 26-10327. The dismissal, issued sua sponte, is based on a lack of appellate jurisdiction. The court determined that the district court's order was not a final decision because claims against three defendants were still pending and the order had not been certified for immediate appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).

This ruling means the appeal cannot proceed at this time. The appellant, Michael Haspel, must await a final judgment from the district court that resolves all claims before a valid appeal can be filed. Legal professionals involved in similar appeals should ensure that all claims are resolved or that proper certification for interlocutory appeal is obtained to avoid dismissal.

What to do next

Review district court orders for finality before filing an appeal.
Ensure all claims are resolved or obtain Rule 54(b) certification for interlocutory appeals.

Source document (simplified)

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 24, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Michael Haspel v. Centurion of Florida, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Citations: None known
Docket Number: 26-10327
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Nature of Suit: NEW
Opinion
Authorities (3)
Cited By (0)
Summaries (0)
Similar Cases (0)
PDF

Combined Opinion

USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 1 of 3

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit

No. 26-10327
Non-Argument Calendar

MICHAEL HASPEL,
Plaintiﬀ-Appellant,
versus

CENTURION OF FLORIDA, LLC,
PAMELA JANSEN,
Nurse Practitioner,
NIKI HESSER,
RN,
MORGAN FISHER,
LPN,
K. MACHUCA,
RN, et al.,
Defendants-Appellees,
JANE DOE,
Nurse,
USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 2 of 3

2 Opinion of the Court 26-10327

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 5:23-cv-00083-MCR-MJF

Before LAGOA, ABUDU, and KIDD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
This appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, for lack of
jurisdiction.
Michael Haspel, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals
from the district court’s order granting in part and denying in part
the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The district court’s order is not final because Haspel’s claims
against three of the defendants remain pending. See 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). The district
court did not certify the order for immediate appeal, and it is not
otherwise immediately appealable. See Sargeant, 689 F.3d at 1246
(explaining that an order disposing of fewer than all claims may
only be appealable if the district court certifies the order under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b)); Plaintiff A v. Schair, 744 F.3d
1247, 1252-53 (11th Cir. 2014) (explaining that an order must
USCA11 Case: 26-10327 Document: 16-1 Date Filed: 03/24/2026 Page: 3 of 3

26-10327 Opinion of the Court 3

resolve a collateral issue completely separate from the merits and
be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment to be
appealable under the collateral order doctrine).