Thomson v. Dean

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Citation19 L.Ed. 94,74 U.S. 342,7 Wall. 342
Decision Date01 December 1868
PartiesTHOMSON v. DEAN

74 U.S. 342
19 L.Ed. 94
7 Wall. 342
THOMSON
v.
DEAN.
December Term, 1868

THIS was a motion to dismiss an appeal from the Circuit Court for West Tennessee, on the ground that the decree from which it was taken was not final.

The record showed that the controversy related to the ownership and transfer of two hundred and four shares of the stock of the Memphis Gaslight Company, and to the rights of the parties under contracts relating to the purchase, sale, and transfer of the stock.

Page 343

The decree directed that Dean, the defendant below and appellant here, transfer forthwith upon the books of the company one hundred and ninety-four shares of the stock to one of the plaintiffs below, who are appellees here, and ten shares to another. It directed further, that account be taken and stated as to the amount paid and to be paid for the stock, and as to dividends accrued, and to be credited under the contracts between the parties. This decree was rendered on the 12th of March, 1868, and appeal was allowed on the same day. Bond was given on the 23d.

Mr. Phillips, in support of the motion:

It is, perhaps, not quite easy to reconcile all the decisions of this court on the question as to what is a 'final decree' upon which an appeal will lie.

In Forgay v. Conrad,1 Taney, C. J., delivering the opinion, says:

'Where the decree decides the right to the property in contest and directs it to be delivered up, or directs it to be sold, and the complainant is entitled to have it carried into immediate execution, the decree must be regarded as final to that extent, although it may be necessary by a further decree to adjust the account between the parties.'

The principle thus laid down indicates that there may be more than one 'final decree' in a cause. But later decisions seem not to sustain what is said in that case.

In Beebe v. Russell2 the case of Forgay is referred to with the evident intent that it should not be regarded as establishing a principle. 'The fact is,' say the court, 'that the order of reference to the master was peculiar, making it doubtful if it could in any way qualify the antecedent decree.'

So far from sustaining the principle announced in Forgay's case, the court reiterates the decision in the case of The Palmyra,3 where restitution, with costs and damages, had

Page 344

been decreed, but the damages had not been assessed. This was held on appeal not to be a final decree. The ground of the holding was, that an appeal would lie...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 practice notes
  • Wells v. Shriver, Case Number: 10431
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • April 5, 1921
    ...the above statute, and approving the opinion in Forgay v. Conrad, supra, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Dean v. Nelson, 7 Wall. 342, 19 L. Ed. 94, says:"We are asked to dismiss the appeal in this cause, on the ground that the decree from which it was taken was not final. On......
  • United States v. 243.22 Acres of Land, No. 349.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • June 26, 1942
    ...by a further decree the accounts between the parties pursuant to the decree passed."11 The same ruling was made in Thomson v. Dean, 7 Wall. 342, 345, 19 L. Ed. 94. There, in a suit relating to the ownership and transfer of certain shares of stock, the decree decided that the right of b......
  • Kelly Inn No. 102, Inc. v. Kapnison, Nos. 19021
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • January 7, 1992
    ...on the recoverability of attorney's fees, it is nevertheless final. 9 See, for example, Thomson v. Dean, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 342, 345, 19 L.Ed. 94 (1868) (stating that "this court has always desired that appeals be taken only from decrees which are not only final but complete" and r......
  • Rector v. United States, No. 7172.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • May 28, 1927
    ...S. 527 26 L. Ed. 1157) has no application here. Nor have cases like Forgay v. Conrad, 6 How. 201, 204 12 L. Ed. 404 and Thomson v. Dean, 7 Wall. 342, 345 19 L. Ed. 94, where decrees finally disposing of property which the successful party was entitled to have carried into execution immediat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
50 cases
  • Wells v. Shriver, Case Number: 10431
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • April 5, 1921
    ...the above statute, and approving the opinion in Forgay v. Conrad, supra, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Dean v. Nelson, 7 Wall. 342, 19 L. Ed. 94, says:"We are asked to dismiss the appeal in this cause, on the ground that the decree from which it was taken was not final. On......
  • United States v. 243.22 Acres of Land, No. 349.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • June 26, 1942
    ...by a further decree the accounts between the parties pursuant to the decree passed."11 The same ruling was made in Thomson v. Dean, 7 Wall. 342, 345, 19 L. Ed. 94. There, in a suit relating to the ownership and transfer of certain shares of stock, the decree decided that the right of b......
  • Kelly Inn No. 102, Inc. v. Kapnison, Nos. 19021
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • January 7, 1992
    ...on the recoverability of attorney's fees, it is nevertheless final. 9 See, for example, Thomson v. Dean, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 342, 345, 19 L.Ed. 94 (1868) (stating that "this court has always desired that appeals be taken only from decrees which are not only final but complete" and r......
  • Rector v. United States, No. 7172.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • May 28, 1927
    ...S. 527 26 L. Ed. 1157) has no application here. Nor have cases like Forgay v. Conrad, 6 How. 201, 204 12 L. Ed. 404 and Thomson v. Dean, 7 Wall. 342, 345 19 L. Ed. 94, where decrees finally disposing of property which the successful party was entitled to have carried into execution immediat......
  • 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