Russell v. Barnes Foundation

Decision Date25 June 1943
Docket NumberNo. 8393.,8393.
Citation136 F.2d 654
PartiesRUSSELL v. BARNES FOUNDATION.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Robert T. McCracken, of Philadelphia, Pa. (Samuel Fessenden, of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Thomas Raeburn White, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Before MARIS, JONES, and GOODRICH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In this case the district court entered a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant under Civil Procedure Rule 56, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, and ordered that the case proceed to trial for the determination of the amount of damages to which the plaintiff is entitled. From the order thus entered the defendant took the present appeal.

The plaintiff has moved to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the order appealed from is not a final decision subject to appellate review by this court under Section 128 of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. § 225. The motion must be granted since the order appealed from, although it determines the liability of the defendant to the plaintiff, will not become a final adjudication of the controversy between them until the damages to which the plaintiff is entitled have been assessed. See Guarantee Co. v. Mechanics' S. B. & Trust Co., 173 U.S. 582, 19 S.Ct. 551, 43 L.Ed. 818.

The appeal is dismissed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • McGill v. Parsons
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 1 Junio 1976
    ...v. International Telecoin, 208 F.2d 934 (CA2 1953), Tye v. Hertz Drivurself Stations, 173 F.2d 317 (CA3 1949), Russell v. Barnes Foundation, 136 F.2d 654 (CA3 1943). Thus the only possible authorization for an appeal from the District Court's order would be pursuant to the provisions of 28 ......
  • Tridyn Industries, Inc. v. American Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 5 Febrero 1979
    ...Co. v. Wetzel, supra, 424 U.S. 737; Leonidakis v. International Telecoin Corp., 208 F.2d 934 (2d Cir. 1953); Russell v. Barnes Foundation, 136 F.2d 654 (3d Cir. 1943); Link v. State Department of Fish and Game, 566 P.2d 806 (Mont.1977); 6 Moore's Federal Practice, P 56.18 (2d Ed. 1976); Wri......
  • Poorbaugh v. Mullen
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • 20 Enero 1981
    ...424 U.S. 737, 96 S.Ct. 1202, 47 L.Ed.2d 435 (1976); Tye v. Hertz Drivurself Stations, 173 F.2d 317 (3d Cir. 1949); Russell v. Barnes Foundation, 136 F.2d 654 (3d Cir. 1943). The interlocutory order entered does not fall within the orbit of § 39-3-4, N.M.S.A.1978 which relates to appealable ......
  • Coffman v. Federal Laboratories, 9545.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 9 Noviembre 1948
    ...the District Courts of the United States with Report Thereon. 80th Cong. 1st Sess. House Doc. No. 473, p. 118. 12 Russell v. Barnes Foundation, 3 Cir., 1943, 136 F.2d 654; see Moore, Federal Practice § 56.09 13 Audi Vision, Inc., v. RCA Mfg. Co., 2 Cir., 1943, 136 F.2d 621, 625, 147 A.L.R. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT