Eastom v Tulsa

Eastom sued Tulsa and several other defendants under 42 USC 1983 alleging malicious prosecution. The district court granted summary judgment for Tulsa and some other defendants, but, concluded a claim against a federal agent was stayed under the bankruptcy code. Eastom appealed, but, it was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction based on no final judgment as the voluntarily dismissed claim against the agent could be brought again under Oklahoma’s saving statute. Eastom waited the one year savings statute period and appealed again. The panel held there is still no final judgment as Oklahoma law excludes the period while a bankruptcy stay is in effect from the savings period and the agent’s bankruptcy case is still pending.