Smith v. Zumpfe
Decision Date | 13 June 1940 |
Docket Number | No. 27425.,27425. |
Citation | 217 Ind. 431,27 N.E.2d 878 |
Parties | SMITH v. ZUMPFE et al. |
Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Probate Court, Marion County; Smiley N. Chambers, judge.
Suit between David T. Smith and William A. Zumpfe and others involving the sale of realty in a receivership proceeding. From an order for sale of realty, David T. Smith appealed, and the case was transferred from the Appellate Court under Section 4-217, Burns' Ann.St.1933. On motion to dismiss appeal.
Appeal dismissed.Fred Barrett and Bachelder & Bachelder, all of Indianapolis, for appellant.
Davis, Pantzer, Baltzell & Sparks, of Indianapolis, for appellees.
This case comes before us on a motion to dismiss, and the question is whether the order sought to be reviewed is a final judgment or an interlocutory decree. If it is interlocutory the appeal was not taken in time.
The order was one for the sale of real estate entered in a receivership proceeding. It was recited therein, ‘that the Court expressly reserves jurisdiction to refuse for any reason to confirm any sale made pursuant to this order.’ An order for the sale of real estate in which the court reserves the right to refuse to confirm the sale is usually regarded as interlocutory, upon the theory that a final order is not entered in such a proceeding until the sale is confirmed by the court. This is the rule with respect to proceedings to sell real estate in the settlement of decedents' estates. In Staley v. Dorset, 1858, 11 Ind. 367, it was said: We can perceive no sound reason why the same rule should not be applicable to an order of sale entered in a receivership proceeding where the sale is made contingent upon subsequent approval.
This is the second appeal growing out of this receivership, and the appellant says that in the former case we held, in effect, that an order of the character here involved was final and not interlocutory, and that said decision is therefore binding upon this court and the parties alike. The case...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lee v. DeShaney
...its classification as final or interlocutory. Matter of Estate of Garwood, (1980) 272 Ind. 519, 400 N.E.2d 758; Smith v. Zumpfe, (1940) 217 Ind. 431, 27 N.E.2d 878. "A final judgment ... is one which determines the rights of the parties in the suit, or a distinct and definite branch of it, ......