Skip to main content

Appealing before fees are decided

Ray Haluch Gravel v. Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Participating Employers

Updated Oct 19, 2026

In brief

The Supreme Court overturned the First Circuit and sent the case back: the unresolved contract-fee request did not make Ray Haluch Gravel's appeal timely.

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 9-0 · January 15, 2014 · Opinion by Justice Kennedy

What it’s about
Ray Haluch Gravel appealed a ruling over unpaid contributions to a union benefit fund while the fund’s request for contractual attorney’s fees remained unresolved.
Who it affects
The appeal of the June 17 decision was untimely even though the fund's request for contractual attorney fees was still unresolved.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Ray Haluch Gravel Company v. Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Participating Employers
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The Supreme Court ruled the appeal was too late, overturned the First Circuit’s ruling, and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded).

The underlying dispute involved unpaid contributions to a union benefit fund and the fund's request for attorney fees under its contract.

The case asked whether a district court's decision can start the appeal deadline before it decides a request for attorney fees under a contract.

Question presented

Is a district court's decision on the merits, which fails to resolve a request for contractual attorney's fees, a "final decision" for the purposes of appeal?

What the Court decided

Holding

The appeal of the June 17 decision was untimely. 695 F. 3d 1, reversed and remanded.

Result
Reversed

The Court's reasoning

The Court said attorney-fee requests generally are separate from a decision on the main case. The fund's contract-based request therefore did not delay the deadline to appeal the June 17 decision.

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 9joined the Court's opinion
  1. Breyer
  2. Kagan
  3. Thomas
  4. Scalia
  5. Kennedywrote the opinion
  6. Ginsburg
  7. Sotomayor
  8. Roberts
  9. Alito
9 justices joined the judgment.

What's next

The case returns to the First Circuit, which must proceed under the Supreme Court's ruling that the appeal of the June 17 decision was too late.

Documents

1

Docket activity

9
  • New analysis added

    Oct 19, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis

    Oct 19, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Oct 19, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Oct 19, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary

    Oct 19, 2026 · Generated

Show 4 more
  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Oct 19, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Oct 19, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Oct 17, 2026 · Court records

  • Opinion added: Ray Haluch

    Jan 15, 2014 · Court records

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Oct 19, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis