Sauri v. Sauri, No. 2440.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBINGHAM, ANDERSON, and WILSON, Circuit
Citation45 F.2d 90
Decision Date26 November 1930
Docket NumberNo. 2440.
PartiesSAURI v. SAURI et al.

45 F.2d 90 (1930)

SAURI
v.
SAURI et al.

No. 2440.

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

November 26, 1930.


45 F.2d 91

Jose Tous Soto (of Tous Soto & Zapater), of Ponce, Porto Rico, for appellant.

Jose A. Poventud, of Ponce, Porto Rico (Alberto S. Poventud, of Ponce, Porto Rico, on the brief), for appellees.

Before BINGHAM, ANDERSON, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from the Supreme Court of Porto Rico. Felix Sauri Vivas died on December 24, 1915, leaving a widow, three children, and a large estate. Early in 1916 the family agreed to hold the estate in community for an indefinite time; it was managed by the plaintiff, Rafael. In 1921 they determined to terminate this community holding. It is undisputed that the widow is entitled to a half of the property, and the three children, now of full age, each to one-third of the other half.

The estate consisted of personalty, urban properties, and extensive rural properties, devoted to sugar raising, grazing, etc. The parties agreed to the division of the personalty in kind, and that the urban property should be sold at auction and the proceeds divided. Controversy arose relative only to the rural properties. Plaintiff contends that they should be divided in specie; defendants that they should be sold and the proceeds divided.

The District Court held for the plaintiff:

"That the rural properties of the community be divided and that this division be made by lots, which will be adjudicated to each of the co-participants in such a manner that a piece of land in each property, proportionate to the interest of each co-owner, be allotted to each; the appointment of three referees is hereby ordered, one referee for each one of the parties to this suit, who shall suggest them to the court, and the third one to be appointed directly by the court; these referees shall proceed to the division of the property and subsequently thereto shall submit reports, to be approved by the court, in conformity with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure in force."

On appeal to the Supreme Court, this part of the decree was reversed.

The appellees now question the jurisdiction of this court on two grounds: (1) Because the appeal was taken prematurely; and (2) for lack of the jurisdictional amount of $5,000. 28 USCA § 225.

The judgment of the Supreme Court is dated April 30, 1929, and the petition for appeal and supersedeas was filed June 29, 1929, when a motion for reconsideration was pending. This was overruled on July 15, 1929. The petition for appeal was allowed on July 15, and the bond for costs approved July 29. It is therefore immaterial that the petition for appeal was filed while the motion for reconsideration was pending.

Equally untenable is the claim that the amount in controversy does not exceed $5,000. The finding of the Supreme Court that the decreased value of the pump alone, if the partition were in kind, would amount to some $10,000, is enough to dispose of that contention.

The case comes here on four assignments of error. The first and second allege error by the Supreme Court in not holding the judgment of the District Court as merely interlocutory and therefore appealable only within ten days. This may be briefly disposed of. The judgment of the District Court is dated October 24, 1924, but a motion for reconsideration was filed on November 18, 1924, and denied on November 21, 1924. The appeal was taken on November 22, 1924, and served on November...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Southland Industries v. Federal Communications Com'n, No. 7018.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • June 15, 1938
    ...therefore, the decision is not in conflict with the general rule stated above. Similarly, in the case of Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90 — also relied on by appellant — the decision interpreted a rule of practice governing appeals from the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, and held that allo......
  • Fernandez v. Carrasquillo, No. 3964.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • December 18, 1944
    ...of a petition for rehearing. In Davila v. Collazo, 50 P.R.R. 475, the court held that the decision of this court in Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90, "has been accepted as authority * * * sustaining the proposition that the filing of a motion for reconsideration of a judgment * * * renews......
  • Landry Mfg. Co. v. CP Rockwell, Inc., No. 2460.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • November 26, 1930
    ...referred to in claim 3 can mean only a cable. The gist of the alleged invention is found in the following extract from the specification: 45 F.2d 90 "The slippage of the cable and lever automatically takes care of the difference in slackness of cable, so that neither brake takes effect unti......
  • Sting v. Beckham
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 28, 1949
    ...will not be disturbed on appeal. Bartlett v. Mackey, 130 Cal. 181, 183, 62 P. 482; Mitchell v. Cline, supra; Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90; De Roulet v. Mitchel, 70 Cal.App.2d 120, 160 P.2d Judgment affirmed. BARNARD, P. J., and MUSSELL, J., concur. ...
4 cases
  • Southland Industries v. Federal Communications Com'n, No. 7018.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • June 15, 1938
    ...therefore, the decision is not in conflict with the general rule stated above. Similarly, in the case of Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90 — also relied on by appellant — the decision interpreted a rule of practice governing appeals from the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, and held that allo......
  • Fernandez v. Carrasquillo, No. 3964.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • December 18, 1944
    ...of a petition for rehearing. In Davila v. Collazo, 50 P.R.R. 475, the court held that the decision of this court in Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90, "has been accepted as authority * * * sustaining the proposition that the filing of a motion for reconsideration of a judgment * * * renews......
  • Landry Mfg. Co. v. CP Rockwell, Inc., No. 2460.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • November 26, 1930
    ...referred to in claim 3 can mean only a cable. The gist of the alleged invention is found in the following extract from the specification: 45 F.2d 90 "The slippage of the cable and lever automatically takes care of the difference in slackness of cable, so that neither brake takes effect unti......
  • Sting v. Beckham
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • November 28, 1949
    ...will not be disturbed on appeal. Bartlett v. Mackey, 130 Cal. 181, 183, 62 P. 482; Mitchell v. Cline, supra; Sauri v. Sauri, 1 Cir., 45 F.2d 90; De Roulet v. Mitchel, 70 Cal.App.2d 120, 160 P.2d Judgment affirmed. BARNARD, P. J., and MUSSELL, J., concur. ...

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