Ritter v. Wyoga Gas & Oil Corporation
| Decision Date | 12 April 1940 |
| Docket Number | No. 7248.,7248. |
| Citation | 110 F.2d 524 |
| Parties | RITTER et al. v. WYOGA GAS & OIL CORPORATION. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Thomas Wood and Wm. H. Wood, both of Williamsport, Pa., for appellants.
Gresser & Walker, of New York City, and Richard Henry Klein, Carl Rice, and Russell S. Machmer, all of Sunbury, Pa., for appellee.
Before BIGGS, MARIS, and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
The Wyoga Gas & Oil Corporation brought suit in the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the appellants and twenty-four other individuals. Twenty-four of the defendants, including the two appellants, were served. Two of the defendants were nonresidents and were not served. The appellants moved in the District Court to dismiss the complaint upon the ground that the court was without jurisdiction to entertain the suit in the absence of the two nonresident defendants who were alleged to be indispensable parties. The District Court entered an order refusing the motion to dismiss the complaint and granting the defendants leave to file an answer within twenty days. The present appeal is from this order. Our brief recital of the proceedings in the District Court makes it clear that the order appealed from was not a final order but merely interlocutory in its nature. It follows that we are without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Grand Trunk Western R. Co. v. McHie, 6 Cir., 100 F.2d 86.
The appeal is dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pepsico, Inc. v. FTC
...(2d ed. 1968), and this principle has been applied to a refusal to dismiss for failure to join indispensable parties. Ritter v. Wyoga Gas & Oil Corp., 110 F.2d 524 (3 Cir.), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 669, 61 S.Ct. 29, 85 L.Ed. 430 (1940). Many of the considerations supporting the final judgmen......
-
Pepsico, Inc. v. FTC
...under the applicable statutes, it cannot be reviewed by the federal courts at this stage of the proceedings. Cf. Ritter v. Wyoga Gas & Oil Corporation, 110 F.2d 524 (3rd Cir.), cert. denied, 311 U.S. 669, 61 S.Ct. 29, 85 L.Ed. 430 (1940). The usual avenue for judicial review of actions take......
-
Dostal v. Baltimore & OR Co.
...Co. of New York v. Turby, 3 Cir., 1935, 81 F.2d 229, 230; Beighle v. Le Roy, 3 Cir., 1938, 94 F.2d 30, 31; and Ritter v. Wyoga Gas and Oil Corporation, 3 Cir., 1940, 110 F.2d 524, cert. denied 1940, 311 U.S. 669, 61 S. Ct. 29, 85 L.Ed. 430. When we analyze the order of the court below in th......
-
WALLACE PRODUCTS v. Falco Products
...It would be pedantic to cite a long list of authorities on this incontrovertible point. Our own decisions in Ritter v. Wyoga Gas & Oil Corp., 3d Cir., 1940, 110 F.2d 524 and Morgenstern Chemical Co. v. Schering Corp., 3d Cir., 1950, 181 F.2d 160, are directly in point. See also Cummings v. ......