Tina Marquardt challenged New Orleans's short-term rental permitting regime, seeking a permanent injunction, a declaratory judgment, and attorney fees. In February 2024, the district court granted Marquardt's summary judgment motion, ruling that the City violated the Takings Clause during a brief period before her 2023 permits expired. The court then directed Marquardt to brief appropriate remedies. Marquardt only briefed attorney fees, which the district court granted in part. However, the resulting document styled as a 'judgment' did not clearly state whether a declaratory judgment was awarded or if other relief was denied, leaving the scope of the victory ambiguous.
The Fifth Circuit focused on the requirements for a final order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The court reasoned that a final order must specify the remedies that the victorious plaintiffs will receive. The opinion cited Hignell-Stark v. City of New Orleans, noting that the current judgment failed to clarify whether declaratory relief was awarded. While the court acknowledged that the remedies deadline passed without further briefing and the district court addressed the only remedy affirmatively pursued, it emphasized that the court neither stated it was entering a declaratory judgment nor made clear that all relief not granted was denied. The court cited Kira, Inc. v. All Star Maintenance, Inc. regarding customary practice, concluding that the ambiguity required correction to ensure the finality of the order.
The case is remanded for the limited purpose of issuing an amended judgment that expressly identifies the specific relief granted and denied in the November 2024 judgment. The district court must do this within 14 days. The parties do not need to file a new notice of appeal or submit additional briefing, and the Fifth Circuit panel retains jurisdiction. This ensures the judgment is final and unambiguous regarding the remedies available to Marquardt.