Grant v. Phoenix Mut Ins Co
Decision Date | 18 December 1882 |
Citation | 1 S.Ct. 414,27 L.Ed. 237,106 U.S. 429 |
Parties | GRANT v. PHOENIX MUT. L. INS. CO |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This is an appeal from the following decree in a suit for the forclosure of certain deeds of trust in the nature of mortgages to secure the payment of money:
To this was added an order appointing a receiver to take possession of the property, make leases, etc.
Wm. A. Meloy, for appellant.
W. F. Mattingly and R. T. Merrick, for appellee.
A motion is now made to dismiss because the decree appealed from is not a final decree.
The rule is well settled that a decree to be final, within the meaning of that term as used in the acts of congress giving this court jurisdiction on appeal, must terminate the litigation of the parties on the merits of the case, so that if there should be an affirmance here, the court below would have nothing to do but to execute the decree it had already rendered. This subject was considered at the present term in Bostwick v. Brinkerhoff, where a large number of cases are cited. It has also been many times decided that a decree of sale in a foreclosure suit, which settles all the rights of the parties and leaves nothing to be done but to make the sale and pay out the proceeds, is a final...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. 243.22 Acres of Land
...20 How. 552, 554, 15 L.Ed. 1020; Bostwick v. Brinkerhoff, 106 U.S. 3, 4, 1 S.Ct. 15, 27 L.Ed. 73; Grant v. Phoenix Mut. Life Ins. Co., 106 U.S. 429, 431, 1 S.Ct. 414, 27 L.Ed. 237; Dainese v. Kendall, 119 U.S. 53, 7 S.Ct. 65, 30 L. Ed. 305; Covington v. First National Bank of Covington, 185......
-
Brown Shoe Co v. United States
...the execution of the decree.' City of Louisa v. Levi, 6 Cir., 140 F.2d 512, 514. See, e.g., Grant v. Phoenix Mutual Life Ins. Co., 106 U.S. 429, 1 S.Ct. 414, 27 L.Ed. 237; Taylor v. Board of Education, 2 Cir., 288 F.2d 2. For example, the report which accompanied the 1925 Act to the floor o......
-
In re Jefferson Cnty.
... ... immediately transferred the properties held by the Receiver for the Alabama receivership court to this Court's exclusive jurisdiction under the grant of 28 U.S.C. 1334(e)(1) and the Receiver, at best, holds the County's sewer system for this Court, not another court. With one exception, the ... What is set forth in Grant v. Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Co. is: [T]he possession of the receiver is that of the court, and he holds, pending the suit, for the benefit of whomsoever ... ...
-
Citibank, N. A. v. Data Lease Financial Corp.
...from an order directing transfer of property to a receiver but not directing an immediate sale, Grant v. Phoenix Mutual Life Ins. Co., 106 U.S. (16 Otto) 429, 1 S.Ct. 414, 27 L.Ed. 237 (1882); or from an order directing a sale of property but not determining the amount of an unliquidated cl......
-
FINALITY AND FORECLOSURE: DETERMINING A HOMEOWNER'S ABILITY TO APPEAL IN MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE CASES.
...Id. (179) Id. (180) See, e.g., McGourkey v. Toledo & Ohio Cent. Ry. Co., 146 U.S. 536, 545 (1892); Grant v. Phx. Mut. Life Ins. Co., 106 U.S. 429, 431 (1882) ("It has also been many times decided that a decree of sale in a foreclosure suit, which settles all the rights of the parties an......