From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hineline v. Molyneaux

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Nov 19, 1934
73 F.2d 925 (8th Cir. 1934)

Opinion

No. 387.

November 19, 1934.

Application by Stewart E. Hineline for a writ of mandamus against Joseph W. Molyneaux, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

Application denied.

Adrian H. David, of Minneapolis, Minn. (Mortimer H. Boutelle and Robert J. Flanagan, both of Minneapolis, Minn., on the brief), for petitioner.

Clark R. Fletcher, of Minneapolis, Minn. (Junell, Driscoll, Fletcher, Dorsey Barker, of Minneapolis, Minn., on the brief), for respondent.

Before STONE, GARDNER, and VAN VALKENBURGH, Circuit Judges.


A careful analysis of the situation in this application for a writ of mandamus directed to Judge Molyneaux, of the District of Minnesota, convinces that the subject-matter of this controversy may be completely covered through an appeal, and that there are no particular circumstances which require use of this extraordinary writ of mandamus to preserve the rights of the parties completely. In this situation, and without examination of the merits of the controversy, it is our duty to deny the application for the writ. Ex parte Riddle, 255 U.S. 450, 41 S. Ct. 370, 65 L. Ed. 725; McClellan v. Carland, 217 U.S. 268, 30 S. Ct. 501, 54 L. Ed. 762; Minnesota Ontario Paper Co. et al. v. Molyneaux (C.C.A.) 70 F.2d 545.


Summaries of

Hineline v. Molyneaux

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Nov 19, 1934
73 F.2d 925 (8th Cir. 1934)
Case details for

Hineline v. Molyneaux

Case Details

Full title:HINELINE v. MOLYNEAUX, United States District Judge for the District of…

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Nov 19, 1934

Citations

73 F.2d 925 (8th Cir. 1934)

Citing Cases

Armour Co. v. Miller

In addition to the foregoing considerations, which in my opinion should influence our decision, the writ…