Summary
In Honig and its successors, the discovery at issue involved the principal parties, not an intervening party that has no stake in the merits of the underlying action.
Summary of this case from Newby v. Enron Corp.Opinion
No. 25987.
December 2, 1968.
John Cyril Malloy, Edmond J. Gong, Miami, Fla., Carl Wisner, Jr., Fort Lauderdale, Fla., for appellant.
Richard F. Ralph, Miami, Fla., Januar D. Bove, Jr., Wilmington, Del., for appellee; Ralph Anderson, Miami, Fla., Connolly, Bove Lodge, Wilmington, Del., of counsel.
Before TUTTLE, and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges, and MITCHELL, District Judge.
This is an appeal by a witness not a party to the principal lawsuit, from an order of the trial court requiring him to submit to further examination by deposition. We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed under the general rule that a discovery order incident to a pending action is not subject to appeal. See 6 Moore, Federal Practice, Sec. 54.07, and cases cited. This is not a final order, and we find no facts in the record that would warrant our invoking the exception to the rule as outlined in Overby v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., (5 Cir. 1955) 224 F.2d 158.
The appeal is dismissed.