“Is there any way I can appeal this?!?” might be the most common question appellate specialists confront when buttonholed by colleagues and clients. What to do with a catastrophic trial-court ruling that materially impacts a client’s case without resulting in an appealable judgment is one of the perennially vexing problems in litigation. In federal court, there are tools litigants can use to seek interlocutory review of significant orders, but those tools depend on the exercise of judicial discretion. And appellate lawyers are compelled to admit that courts rarely exercise their discretion to grant interlocutory review.

In some cases, this has led parties to conclude that they should dismiss their claims in order to secure an appealable judgment, rather than litigate under the shadow of whatever adverse order they wish to challenge. As demonstrated by the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Langere v. Verizon Wireless Servs., this is a risky maneuver at best.