Richards v. Dunne, 6180.
| Citation | 325 F.2d 155 |
| Decision Date | 03 December 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 6180.,6180. |
| Parties | Thomas R. RICHARDS et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. Raymond J. DUNNE, Defendant, Appellee. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit) |
F. Lee Bailey, Boston, Mass., for appellants.
John C. Eldridge, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., with whom John W. Douglas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D. C., W. Arthur Garrity, Jr., U. S. Atty., Boston, Mass., and Alan S. Rosenthal, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., were on brief, for appellee.
Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and HARTIGAN and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges.
The court below on June 4, 1963, entered an order granting the defendant's motion to dismiss "* * * with leave to the plaintiff to amend within twenty days (20) stating the claim attempted to be set forth in paragraph 6 of the present Complaint." Twenty-two days later on June 26, 1963, the plaintiffs filed notice of appeal "from so much of the Order of June 4, 1963, as dismisses" the plaintiffs' complaint for a different cause of action from that attempted to be asserted in paragraph 6.
The appeal must be dismissed as untimely. There has been no compliance with the requirements for interlocutory appeal under either Title 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) or under Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We therefore need not and do not consider whether either provision might be available. And the decision of the court below is not final for, "Another order of absolute dismissal after expiration of the time allowed for amendment is required to make a final disposition of the cause." Cory Bros. & Co., Ltd., v. United States, 47 F.2d 607 (C.A.2, 1931), quoted with approval in Jung v. K & D Mining Co., 356 U.S. 335, 337, 78 S.Ct. 764, 2 L.Ed.2d 806 (1958).
In this court appellant sought orally to waive his separate paragraph 6 claim (although he had maintained otherwise in his brief). We cannot obtain jurisdiction by any such patchwork procedure.
An order will be entered dismissing the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
N. Am. Butterfly Ass'n v. Wolf
...denial of injunctive relief or asserting that jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).3 See, e.g. , Richards v. Dunne , 325 F.2d 155, 156 (1st Cir. 1963) (per curiam) (citing Jung v. K. & D. Mining Co. , 356 U.S. 335, 78 S.Ct. 764, 2 L.Ed.2d 806 (1958) (per curiam) for the proposit......
-
Britt v. DeJoy
...a plaintiff who chooses to appeal without amending her complaint must first obtain a separate final judgment); Richards v. Dunne , 325 F.2d 155, 156 (1st Cir. 1963) (per curiam) (holding that a plaintiff may not appeal directly when given leave to amend but must obtain a separate and final ......
-
Makovi v. Sherwin-Williams Co.
...(1970), and cases there cited. 5 See also Jung v. K.D. Mining Co., 356 U.S. 335, 78 S.Ct. 764, 2 L.Ed.2d 806 (1958); Richards v. Dunne, 325 F.2d 155, 156 (1st Cir.1963). Consequently, the February 13th order of appeal was premature. Final judgment was entered in this case on March 5, 1987, ......
-
Nichols v. Nichols
...Bastian v. Petren Resources Corp., 892 F.2d 680 (7th Cir.1990); Blanco v. United States, 775 F.2d 53 (2d Cir.1985); Richards v. Dunne, 325 F.2d 155 (1st Cir.1963); Groves v. City of Darlington, S.C., 346 Fed.Appx. 965 (4th Cir.2009). See, also, Anastasiadis v. S.S. Little John, 339 F.2d 538......