discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Heartwood, Incorporated v. United States Forest Service our pendent appellate jurisdiction encompasses at least determinations that are inextricably intertwined with ones over which we have direct jurisdiction

discussed Cited "see" Standley v. Town of Woodfin See State v. Burnett, 93 Ohio St.3d 419, 431-32 , 755 N.E.2d 857, 868 (2001) (in holding that city lacked authority to enact an ordinance barring people convicted of a drug-related offense from a specified zone, stating that "there is no authority for the proposition that a municipality may, by way of ordinance, add a penalty for violation of a state criminal statute that is not otherwise provided for by the General Assembly"), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1034 , 122 S.Ct. 1790 , 152 L.Ed.2d 649 (2002).

discussed Cited "see" Heartwood, Inc. v. United States Forest Service See Greenwell v. Aztar Gaming Corp., 268 F.3d 486, 491 (7th Cir.2001) (appropriate to exercise pendent jurisdiction where the issues are intertwined and interlocutory appeal prevents rather than produces piecemeal appeal), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1034 , 122 S.Ct. 1790 , 152 L.Ed.2d 649 (2002); Twelve John Does et al. v. District of Columbia et al., 117 F.3d 571 (D.C.Cir.1997) (“our pendent appellate jurisdiction encompasses at least determinations that are inextricably intertwined with ones over which we have direct jurisdiction”); see also Jones v. InfoCure Corp., 310 F.3d 529, 536-37 (7th…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Nord v. Kelly (2×) See also Boxx v. Long Warrior, 265 F.3d 771, 775 (9th Cir.2001) (considering the plain language of a right-of-way for a National Park Service road over Indian land and determining that the tribe had “expressly reserved no right to exercise dominion or control over the right-of-way5’ (internal marks omitted)), cert. de nied, 535 U.S. 1034 , 122 S.Ct. 1790 , 152 L.Ed.2d 649 (2002), disapproved on other grounds, Smith v. Salish Kootenai Coll., 434 F.3d 1127 , 1137 n. 4 (9th Cir.2006) (en banc).