Collier v. Picard, 12951.
| Decision Date | 19 September 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 12951.,12951. |
| Citation | 237 F.2d 234 |
| Parties | Fred B. COLLIER et al., Appellants, v. Honorable Frank A. PICARD, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Fred B. Collier, Royal Oak, Mich., Philip Pratt and Clarence L. Smith, Pontiac, Mich., for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
A motion has been filed to dismiss this appeal from an order of a district judge refusing to disqualify himself in a proceeding in response to a motion and affidavit of bias or prejudice filed under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 144.
The order of which the appellants complain is not appealable. It is not a final decision, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291; it is not such an interlocutory order or decree as is described in 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292. In re Chicago Rapid Transit Co., 7 Cir., 1953, 200 F.2d 341, 343, 33 A.L.R.2d 1360; Skirvin v. Mesta, 10 Cir., 1944, 141 F.2d 668, 671. The denial of a motion and affidavit of bias or prejudice filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 144 can be reviewed upon appeal of an interlocutory order which is appealable or upon appeal from the final decision in the proceeding in which the motion and affidavit were filed. See Korer v. Hoffman, 7 Cir., 1954, 212 F.2d 211, 213, 45 A.L.R.2d 930.
The motion to dismiss this appeal was filed by the Federal Housing Administration. Its standing to make the motion is questionable, since it has not been named as an appellee. A court of appeals has the duty, however, on its own motion to dismiss an appeal which it does not have jurisdiction to hear.
The present appeal in this cause is therefore dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Gilboy, Crim. No. 12880.
...F.2d at page 671, and holding that denial of a motion to disqualify is not of itself an appealable order. In accord see Collier v. Picard, 6 Cir., 1956, 237 F.2d 234 and see Korer v. Hoffman, 7 Cir., 1954, 212 F.2d 211, 213, 45 A.L.R.2d 930, "No logical reason appears why the refusal of a j......
-
Rosen v. Sugarman
...order denying an application for disqualification of a judge is not a final decision appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234 (6 Cir. 1956); General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Watkins, 331 F.2d 192, 198 (4 Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 952, 84 S.Ct. 1629, 12 L.Ed.2d 498 ......
-
Dubnoff v. Goldstein
...appeal from a final decision on the cause in which the application by affidavit was filed. 28 U.S.C. §§ 144, 1291, 1292; Collier v. Picard, 237 F.2d 234 (6th Cir. 1956); Green v. Murphy, 259 F.2d 591 (3rd Cir. 1958); Rosen v. Sugarman, 357 F.2d 794 (2nd Cir. 1966). See also Freed v. Inland ......
-
Peterson v. McKinley
...118 F.2d 596; Crowe v. Di Manno, 1 Cir., 225 F.2d 652, 659. An appeal does not lie until a final judgment has been entered. Collier v. Picard, 6 Cir., 237 F.2d 234. Both the respondent judge and the respondent party have attacked the sufficiency of the petition for prohibition. Without furt......