Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: CHINESE-MANUFACTURED DRYWALL PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION Guilfort Dieuvil, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Gebrueder Knauf Verwaltungsgesellschaft, KG; Knauf International GmbH; Knauf Insulation GmbH; Knauf UK GmbH; Knauf AMF GmbH and Company, KG; Knauf Do Brasil, Limited; Pt Knauf Gypsum Indonesia; Knauf Gips KG; Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin Company, Limited; Knauf Plasterboard Wuhu Company, Limited; Guangdong Knauf New Building Material Products Company, Limited, Defendants-Appellees
This appeal stems from the ongoing Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Multi-District Litigation. In a recent unpublished opinion, this court dismissed a similar appeal because the appellant had waived his appellate rights in a class settlement agreement. See In re Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Prod. Liab. Litig., 794 F. App'x 387, 389 (5th Cir. 2019). We dismiss this appeal for the same reason and publish this opinion to avert further fruitless attempts at appellate review.
Appellant Guilfort Dieuvil joined the MDL in 2013, alleging his home contained defective Chinese-manufactured drywall. Dieuvil is subject to a class settlement agreement (the “New Claims Settlement Agreement”) that details the process for resolving claims against appellees the Knauf Defendants 1 in the MDL. As part of that process, the district court awarded Dieuvil over $300,000 in damages. Dieuvil appeals the award, and the Knauf Defendants move to dismiss.
As we previously recognized, the New Claims Settlement Agreement expressly states that “[a]ny dispute under this Agreement shall be presented for resolution to the MDL court” and “[t]he MDL's determination shall be final with no appeal.” Id. (emphasis added). The New Claims Settlement Agreement incorporates another agreement that has a similar waiver of appellate rights. These explicit waivers clearly and unequivocally waive Dieuvil's right to appeal. See id.; see also 15A Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice & Procedure § 3901 (2d ed. 2012) (“The most likely occasion for waiver arises from a settlement agreement that calls for resolution of some disputed matter by the district court, coupled with an explicit agreement that the district court decision shall be final and that all rights of appeal are waived.”).
Accordingly, the Knauf Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Knauf Defendants include appellees Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co., Ltd.; Knauf Plasterboard (Wuhu) Co., Ltd.; Guangdong Knauf New Building Material Products Co., Ltd.; Knauf Gips KG; Gebr. Knauf Verwaltungsgesellschaft KG; Knauf International GmbH; Knauf Insulation GmbH; Knauf UK GmbH; Knauf AMF GmbH & Co. KG; Knauf Do Brasil Ltd.; and Pt Knauf Gypsum Indonesia.
PER CURIAM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 20-30120
Decided: May 20, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)