In re Walsh, 7347.

Citation69 F.2d 971
Decision Date02 April 1934
Docket NumberNo. 7347.,7347.
PartiesIn re WALSH.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)

Snedigar & Baya, of Miami, Fla., for petitioner.

Before BRYAN, FOSTER, and SIBLEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Thomas J. Walsh seeks a mandamus nisi against the District Judge to require him to settle and allow a bill of exceptions, touching the proper contents of which they differ, in connection with an appeal to this court. It appears that Walsh, who was the defendant in a suit at law, won the verdict, but a new trial was granted on a motion filed in due time but not set down for hearing within ten days as required by a local rule of the District Court. We think the appeal so clearly unsustainable that a mandamus in aid of it could under no circumstances be granted. The District Court had full power within the term to grant a new trial for the reasons contained in the motion, which appear to be of a usual nature. 28 USCA § 391. The local rule limiting the time for its hearing is a mere rule of practice a disregard of which would not affect the jurisdiction of the court to grant the new trial. Abbott v. Brown, Marshal, 241 U. S. 606, 36 S. Ct. 689, 60 L. Ed. 1199. Indeed, such a rule made by a court may be dispensed with by the court that made it to advance justice in a special case. Wallace v. Clark, 29 Fed. Cas. page 72, No. 17,098. The order granting the new trial was jurisdictionally valid. The granting of it under all the decisions was in the discretion of the court. It leaves the case pending in the District Court, without a final judgment to be appealed from.

Mandamus nisi denied.

* Rehearing denied April 16, 1934.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Libby, McNeill & Libby v. Malmskold
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 23. November 1940
    ...such as a final judgment. Florini v. Stegner, 3 Cir., 82 F.2d 708; East Erie Commercial Ry. Co. v. Denial, 3 Cir., 66 F.2d 555; In re Walsh, 5 Cir., 69 F.2d 971; Nichols v. Republic Iron & Steel Co., 5 Cir., 89 F.2d 927; Hunt v. United States, 10 Cir., 53 F.2d 333; Wright v. Taft-Peirce Mfg......

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