In the case of John W. Behrens v. Robert J. Pelletier, 1995, the U.S Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a qualified immunity defense could be appealed immediately or if it had to wait until after final judgment in a lawsuit involving federal officials accused of violating constitutional rights. The court ruled that orders denying summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity can indeed be appealed before final judgement is reached in a trial. This decision clarified and expanded upon previous rulings regarding when an appeal can be made during ongoing litigation, specifically for cases involving claims against government officials acting within their official capacity.

The dissenting opinion in the case of John W. Behrens v. Robert J. Pelletier argued that the majority's decision to allow an interlocutory appeal was inconsistent with previous court rulings and could potentially lead to a floodgate of premature appeals, thus undermining judicial efficiency. The dissent emphasized that allowing such appeals before final judgment disrupts ongoing proceedings and wastes judicial resources by requiring two courts to familiarize themselves with the same case simultaneously. They also pointed out that this ruling contradicts Congress' intent when it enacted 28 U.S.C §1291, which generally prohibits appellate review until after final judgment has been rendered in order to prevent piecemeal litigation and maintain efficient court operations.