From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Turnbull v. Cyr

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 15, 1950
184 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1950)

Opinion

No. 12493.

August 15, 1950.

Leonard, Hanna Brophy, Edmund D. Leonard, Ivan A. Schwab, all of San Francisco, Cal., for appellants.

Frank J. Hennessy, U.S. Atty., Macklin Fleming, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal. (Ward E. Boote, Chief Counsel, Herbert P. Miller, Asst. Chief Counsel, Bureau of Employees' Comp., Fed. Security Agency, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for appellee Cyr.

Before MATHEWS, STEPHENS and ORR, Circuit Judges.


This appeal is from an order which granted a motion to dismiss a complaint, but did not dismiss it. Such an order is not a final decision, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291, and is not appealable. Prickett v. Consolidated Liquidating Corp., 9 Cir., 180 F.2d 8. See, also, City and County of San Francisco v. McLaughlin, 9 Cir., 9 F.2d 390; Wright v. Gibson, 9 Cir., 128 F.2d 865; Tee-Hit-Ton Tribe of Tlingit Indians v. Olson, 9 Cir., 144 F.2d 347; Peoples Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank, 9 Cir., 149 F.2d 850; Cashion v. Bunn, 9 Cir., 149 F.2d 969. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Mandate to issue forthwith.


Summaries of

Turnbull v. Cyr

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 15, 1950
184 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1950)
Case details for

Turnbull v. Cyr

Case Details

Full title:TURNBULL et al. v. CYR et al

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 15, 1950

Citations

184 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1950)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Peters

This court has frequently held that an order dismissing a complaint, without dismissing the action, is not an…

United States v. State of Arizona

The United States Attorney had the same erroneous concept that such an order is appealable as the fourteen…