Loffredo v. Holt
In Loffredo v. Holt, 2001 UT 97, 37 P.3d 1070, the district court made a number of summary judgment rulings but did not completely dispose of all the claims, including a claim by one party for attorney fees and costs.
The Court stated that "our holding in ProMax Development Corp. v. Raile governs the outcome of this case" and that the final judgment rule "requires that all claims . . . be decided in order for a decision to be appropriately appealed."
Because the claim for attorney fees and costs was still pending before the district court, we concluded that the appeal was not taken from a final judgment, and we dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.