11th Cir.

Grissett v. SCANA Energy

March 20, 2026 ·1:25-mi-00055-MHC ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by a pro se plaintiff for lack of jurisdiction. The court found the notice of appeal was premature because it was filed before the district court entered any order.

Background

Felissa Grissett, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The day after filing the complaint, she filed a notice of appeal. At that time, the district court had not yet entered any order. The notice appeared to complain of the assigned judge and the designation of the action as miscellaneous rather than civil. The district court later entered an order dismissing the action as frivolous.

The court’s reasoning

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed before the district court entered or announced any order. The court cited 28 United States Code Section 1291, which limits appellate jurisdiction to final decisions, and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(c)(1)(B), which requires the notice to designate the judgment or appealable order. The court relied on Bogle versus Orange County Board of County Commissioners to explain that a notice of appeal is ineffective if it attempts to appeal a contemplated future order that does not exist at the time of filing.

What it means going forward

The dismissal reinforces the requirement that parties must wait for a final order or judgment before filing a notice of appeal. It prevents appellate courts from reviewing cases where the lower court has not yet issued a decision.