From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carey v. Danecki

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Apr 25, 1961
289 F.2d 314 (3d Cir. 1961)

Opinion

No. 13426.

Argued February 24, 1961.

Decided April 25, 1961.

James A. McGregor, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.

No oral argument for appellee.

Robert E. Wayman, Dickie, McCamey, Chilcote Robinson, Pittsburgh, Pa., for third-party defendant.

Before KALODNER, STALEY and FORMAN, Circuit Judges.


In this diversity action for damages arising out of an automobile collision, the defendant and third-party plaintiff, Benjamin Danecki, joined the plaintiff, Merle G. Carey as a third-party defendant. Carey subsequently filed an amended answer in which he pleaded as a bar to Danecki's third-party action against him, a release executed prior to the institution of the instant suit. The District Court granted Carey's motion for judgment on the pleadings and this appeal followed.

The record discloses that the District Court did not, in accordance with Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. make an express determination that there was no just reason for delay.

Under the circumstances the appeal must be dismissed as being from an interlocutory order and it is so ordered.


Summaries of

Carey v. Danecki

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Apr 25, 1961
289 F.2d 314 (3d Cir. 1961)
Case details for

Carey v. Danecki

Case Details

Full title:Robert CAREY and Linda Carey, minors, by their parents and natural…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Apr 25, 1961

Citations

289 F.2d 314 (3d Cir. 1961)

Citing Cases

Rinker v. L. Un. No. 24 of Amalgamated Litho

Since the record here does not disclose that the court below made any of the determinations required by Rule…

RePass v. Vreeland

Without the imposition of this hallmark of finality, the circuit court has no jurisdiction to consider the…