Taking the Road Less Traveled Makes All the Difference: The Tenth Circuit Applies the Collateral Order Doctrine Narrowly—and Properly—in Coomer v. Make Your Life Epic LLC
Year: 2026
Type: preprint
Abstract: This note examines whether federal appellate courts may exercise interlocutory jurisdiction under the collateral order doctrine to review district court orders denying motions to dismiss filed pursuant to state anti-SLAPP statutes. Focusing on the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Coomer v. Make Your Life Epic LLC, the note analyzes a growing circuit split over the appealability of anti-SLAPP rulings in federal court. It traces the development of the collateral order doctrine from Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. through subsequent Supreme Court decisions defining the doctrine’s requirements of conclusivity, separability, and unreviewability. The note argues that the Tenth Circuit correctly held that denials of anti-SLAPP motions under Colorado’s statute are not immediately appealable because the inquiry requires courts to assess the plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits through fact-intensive analysis that is inseparable from the underlying claim. Drawing on the Supreme Court’s distinction between pure questions of law and mixed questions of law and fact, the note contends that anti-SLAPP motions more closely resemble evidentiary and merits-based determinations than immunity claims traditionally eligible for interlocutory review. The note further argues that the Tenth Circuit’s approach is more faithful to modern Supreme Court precedent emphasizing the narrow scope of the collateral order doctrine and the importance of preserving the final judgment rule. From a policy perspective, the note maintains that limiting interlocutory appeals prevents duplicative litigation, promotes judicial efficiency, preserves district court autonomy, and avoids imposing an additional procedural burden on plaintiffs pursuing potentially meritorious defamation claims. The note concludes that the Tenth Circuit’s formalist approach provides the sounder framework for resolving the anti-SLAPP appellate-jurisdiction debate while maintaining an appropriate balance between protecting free speech rights and ensuring access to judicial remedies.[This abstract was written by Microsoft Copilot, a generative artificial intelligence.]
Author: Paul Cooke
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
OpenAlex ID: W7024946684
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: