Hewitt v. Charles R. McCormick Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 05 December 1927 |
| Docket Number | 60.,No. 59,59 |
| Citation | 22 F.2d 925 |
| Parties | HEWITT v. CHARLES R. McCORMICK LUMBER CO. OF DELAWARE et al. KEEVENY v. SAME. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
John M. Gardner, of New York City, for plaintiffs in error.
Kirlin, Woolsey, Campbell, Hickox & Keating and Wherry & Mygatt, all of New York City (Delbert M. Tibbetts, Carlos J. Warner, and Frederic E. Mygatt, all of New York City, of counsel), for Charles R. McCormick Lumber Co. of Delaware.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and SWAN, Circuit Judges.
These actions are for breach of contract against Charles R. McCormick Lumber Company of Delaware and Charles R. McCormick & Co., a California corporation. The affidavits interposed a defense that the actions abated as against the California corporation, because it was dissolved and had no legal existence at the time the actions were commenced. On motions duly made, this defense was sustained. Orders were entered, and thereupon these writs were sued out.
Motions are made to dismiss the writs of error because of lack of jurisdiction to review them. Section 128 of the Judicial Code (28 USCA § 225) grants jurisdiction to this court in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal or writ of error final decisions of the district court. The orders entered below are not final dispositions of the cases as between all parties, and these writs of error cannot be maintained. Hohorst v. Hamburg American Packet Co., 148 U. S. 262, 13 S. Ct. 590, 37 L. Ed. 443; Bank of Rondout v. Smith, 156 U. S. 330, 15 S. Ct. 358, 39 L. Ed. 441; Arnold v. Guimarin, 263 U. S. 427, 44 S. Ct. 144, 68 L. Ed. 371; Stromberg Motor Devices Co. v. Arnson et al. (C. C. A.) 239 F. 891; Menge v. Warriner (C. C. A.) 120 F. 816.
The writs of error are dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moss v. Kansas City Life Ins. Co.
...184 F. 916, 924; Lockhart v. New York Life Ins. Co., 4 Cir., 71 F.2d 684; Bush v. Leach, 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 296; Hewitt v. Chas. R. McCormick Lumber Co., 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 925; Herrup v. Stoneham, 2 Cir., 15 F.2d 49), and where there has been involuntary dismissal as to one of several parties (H......
-
Zarati SS Co. v. Park Bridge Corporation, 135
...the enforcement of the federal policy difficult and aleatory. 1 In addition to cases cited above, see Hewitt v. Charles R. McCormick Lumber Co. of Delaware, 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 925; Bush v. Leach, 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 296; Menge v. Warriner, 5 Cir., 120 F. 816; United States v. Girault, 11 How. 22, ......
-
Hunteman v. New Orleans Public Service
...judgment, the appeal is dismissed. 1 See also: Bank of Rondout v. Smith, 156 U.S. 330, 15 S.Ct. 358, 39 L.Ed. 441; Hewitt v. McCormick Lumber Co., 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 925; Moss v. Kansas City Life Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 96 F.2d 108; Atwater v. North American Coal Corp., 2 Cir., 111 F.2d 125. 2 Unite......
-
Atwater v. North American Coal Corporation, 224.
...L.Ed. 443; Bank of Rondout v. Smith, 156 U.S. 330, 15 S.Ct. 358, 39 L.Ed. 441; Menge v. Warriner, 5 Cir., 120 F. 816; Hewitt v. McCormick Lumber Co., 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 925; Bush v. Leach, 2 Cir., 22 F.2d 296; Fields v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Co., 4 Cir., 93 F.2d 559; Moss v. Kansas Cit......