<Tr> <Td> </Td> <Td> This article has no lead section . Please help by adding an introductory section to this article . For more information, see the layout guide, and Wikipedia's lead section guidelines to ensure the section will be inclusive of all the essential details . Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page . (December 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) </Td> </Tr> <P> An interlocutory appeal (or interim appeal), in the law of civil procedure, is an appeal of a ruling by a trial court that is made before all claims are resolved as to all parties . For instance, if a lawsuit contains claims for breach of contract, fraud and interference with contractual advantage, and if there are three defendants in this lawsuit, then until all three claims are resolved as to all three defendants, any appeal by any party will be considered interlocutory . The American courts disfavor such appeals, requiring parties to wait until all the claims as to all parties are resolved before any appeal can be brought to challenge any of the decisions made by the judge during the life of the case . "Although the general rule requires finality in order for a matter to be appealable, there are exceptions arising principally from court rules that permit appeal of interlocutory matters under specific circumstances ." </P> <P> Interlocutory appeals may be brought, however, if waiting to bring an appeal would be particularly prejudicial to the rights of one of the parties . For example, if a party is asserting some form of immunity from suit, or is claiming that the court completely lacks personal jurisdiction over them, then it is recognized that being forced to wait for the conclusion of the trial would violate their right not to be subjected to a trial at all . Alternatively, the trial judge can "certify" one of his orders for immediate interlocutory appeal . Suppose all the claims and issues have been resolved as to one of the defendants, but the rest of the parties will be fighting out the case for another year or ten . The trial judge could "certify" (i.e. signal his agreement) to allow the part of the cases that is concluded at trial level to be appealed . </P> <P> The Supreme Court of the United States delineated the test for the availability of interlocutory appeals, called the collateral order doctrine, for United States federal courts in the case of Lauro Lines s.r.l.v. Chasser, 490 U.S. 495 (1989), holding that under the relevant statute (28 U.S.C. § 1291) such an appeal would be permitted only if: </P>

Difference between interlocutory appeal and writ of mandamus