Roell v. Withrow
Withrow filed a civil rights action against several members of the medical staff at his prison and consented to trial by a magistrate judge; only one of the defendants gave consent. After trial before the magistrate judge, a jury found for the defendants and Withrow timely appeal. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sua sponte ordered a limited remand to determine whether all parties consented to trial before the magistrate. On remand, the remaining defendants gave written consent. The court of appeals held that the defendants’ post-trial consent did not cure the jurisdictional defect caused by pre-trial failure to consent.
Question Presented:
When a district court refers a case to a magistrate judge for trial, under 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(c), and all parties, the magistrate judge, and the jury proceed in a manner consistent with that referral,
must a court of appeals vacate the judgment for lack of jurisdiction because the defendant did not expressly consent?
