Elfman Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp.

Decision Date19 December 1977
Docket NumberNo. 77-2303,77-2303
Citation567 F.2d 1252
Parties1977-2 Trade Cases 61,795 ELFMAN MOTORS, INC., Appellant, v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION, Chrysler Motors Corporation, and Chrysler Leasing Corporation.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

David Berger, Warren D. Mulloy, Steven M. Kramer, Berger & Montague, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

Oliver C. Biddle, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees, Chrysler Financial Corp. and Chrysler Credit Corp.

Robert S. Ryan, Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees, Chrysler Corp., Chrysler Motors Corp., Chrysler Leasing Corp. and Chrysler Realty Corp.

Before WEIS and MARIS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

This is a suit brought by Elfman Motors, Inc. (herein Elfman) in the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Chrysler Corporation (herein Chrysler), Chrysler Motors Corporation (herein Motors), Chrysler Leasing Corporation (herein Leasing), Chrysler Financial Corporation (herein Financial), Chrysler Credit Corporation (herein Credit), and Chrysler Realty Corporation (herein Realty). On September 20, 1976, summary judgment was entered in favor of Financial and Credit on all counts of the complaint. Trial as to the remaining defendants began in February 1977. On February 28 the district court directed a verdict in favor of those defendants on certain of the claims asserted by Elfman in the complaint and the trial continued as to the remaining claims. The jury rendered its verdict against Chrysler and in favor of the remaining defendants, on which verdict judgment was entered on March 9, 1977. Motions for judgment n. o. v. and for a new trial were then made by Chrysler and on August 9, 1977 the district court granted Chrysler's motion for judgment n. o. v. On August 19, 1977, Chrysler's motion for a new trial was granted to be effective only in case the judgment n. o. v. was reversed on appeal.

Elfman filed a notice of appeal on September 1, 1977. Its caption indicated as the parties involved Elfman as plaintiff and Chrysler, Motors and Leasing as defendants. Financial and Credit were not referred to in the caption or otherwise as parties and they were not served with copies of the notice of appeal by counsel for Elfman, the appellant, who served copies only on counsel for Chrysler, Motors and Leasing. The notice itself stated that the appeal was

"from the Orders of the District Court granting defendant Chrysler Corporation's Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, dated August 9, 1977, granting in part defendants Chrysler Corporation, Chrysler Motors Corporation and Chrysler Credit Corporation's 1 Motion for a Directed Verdict, dated February 28, 1977, and granting Chrysler Corporation's Motion for a New Trial, dated August 9, 1977."

However, in its subsequently filed Designation of Issues for Appeal and Designation of the Appendix Elfman mentioned the summary judgment entered in favor of Financial and Credit on September 20, 1976. Thereafter Financial and Credit filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal as to them upon the ground that the notice of appeal does not designate the summary judgment entered in their favor. Chrysler, Motors, Leasing and Realty have filed a response to the motion stating that they do not contest it. Elfman has filed a memorandum in opposition and the motion is now before us for disposition.

The motion must be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 2107 provides with exceptions not here material that

"no appeal shall bring any judgment, order or decree in an action, suit or proceeding of a civil nature before a court of appeals for review unless notice of appeal is filed, within thirty days after the entry of such judgment, order or decree."

Thus the jurisdiction of the court of appeals is invoked by the filing of a notice of appeal. Donovan v. Esso Shipping Company, 259 F.2d 65, 68 (3d Cir. 1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 583, 3 L.Ed.2d 572 (1959). It is, of course, true that since, except in certain types of cases, only a final judgment or order is appealable, the appeal from a final judgment draws in question all prior non-final orders and rulings which produced the judgment. 9 Moore's Federal Practice, 755 (2d ed. 1975).

But in any case, the notice of appeal must conform to the requirement of Rule 3(c), F.R.App.P., that it "shall designate the judgment, order or part thereof appealed from." When an appeal is taken from a specified judgment only or from a part of a specified judgment, the court of appeals acquires thereby no jurisdiction to review other judgments or portions thereof not so specified or otherwise fairly to be inferred from the notice as intended to be presented for review on the appeal. Spound v. Mohasco Industries, Inc.,534 F.2d 404, 410 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 886, 97 S.Ct. 238, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
100 cases
  • MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Teleconcepts, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • December 8, 1995
    ...judgment draws into question all prior non-final orders and rulings.' " Drinkwater, 904 F.2d at 858 (quoting Elfman Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., 567 F.2d 1252, 1253 (3d Cir.1977)). Teleconcepts could not appeal the September 15, 1992 order denying its motion to dismiss MCI's complaint un......
  • Wiest v. Lynch
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • March 19, 2013
    ...” by the notice of appeal. Sulima v. Tobyhanna Army Depot, 602 F.3d 177, 184 (3d Cir.2010) (quoting Elfman Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., 567 F.2d 1252, 1254 (3d Cir.1977)). Yet, we have also held that we “liberally construe [ ] notices of appeal.” Id. (internal quotations marks omitted). ......
  • New Castle County v. Hartford Acc. and Indem. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • May 29, 1991
    ...is apparent and the opposing party is not prejudiced and has a full opportunity to brief the issues."); Elfman Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., 567 F.2d 1252, 1254 (3d Cir.1977) ("It is true that if from the notice of appeal itself and the subsequent proceedings on appeal it appears that the......
  • Lusardi v. Xerox Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • September 16, 1992
    ...or otherwise fairly to be inferred from the notice as intended to be presented for review on the appeal. Elfman Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., 567 F.2d 1252, 1254 (3d Cir.1977). Recently, we translated the standard into a three-pronged test, under which it is proper to exercise appellate j......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Sylvania, Vertical Restraints, and Dual Distribution
    • United States
    • Antitrust Bulletin No. 25-1, March 1980
    • March 1, 1980
    ...Chrysler Corp., 1977-2 Trade Cas., 61,650, at 72,683 (E.D. Pa.) (DEP analyzed under Sylvania's rule ofreason), appeal dismissed in part, 567 F.2d 1252 (3d Cir. 1977). Seealso Speed Auto Sales, Inc. v . American Motors Corp., 477 F. Supp,1193, 1196 (E.D.N.Y.1979)(upholding car manufacturer's......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT