C B S Steel & Forge Co. v. Shultz

Ninth Circuit

C B S Steel & Forge Co. v. Shultz

191 F.2d 683

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 17, 1951

Docket12864

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 191 F.2d 683 (C B S Steel & Forge Co. v. Shultz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

C B S Steel & Forge Co. v. Shultz, 191 F.2d 683 (9th Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Howard Lane and Harold W. Gentis brought an action against appellant. Appellant, as a third-party plaintiff, served a third-party complaint on Gordon W. Shultz, Ernest Puetz and Lee McCoy, as third-party defendants. See Rule 14(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Shultz, Puetz and McCoy moved to dismiss the third-party complaint for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. From an order (improperly called a judgment) granting the motion and dismissing the third-party complaint, appellant has ap>pealed. That order was not a final decision, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291, and was not appealable. Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. United Fuel Gas Co., 4 Cir., 154 F.2d 545; County Bank v. First National Bank, 4 Cir., 184 F.2d 152. Therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Howard Lane and Harold W. Gentis brought an action against appellant. Appellant, as a third-party plaintiff, served a third-party complaint on Gordon W. Shultz, Ernest Puetz and Lee McCoy, as third-party defendants. See Rule 14(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. Shultz, Puetz and McCoy moved to dismiss the third-party complaint for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. From an order (improperly called a judgment) granting the motion and dismissing the third-party complaint, appellant has ap>pealed. That order was not a final decision, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291, and was not appealable. Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. United Fuel Gas Co., 4 Cir., 154 F.2d 545; County Bank v. First National Bank, 4 Cir., 184 F.2d 152. Therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 F.2d 683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-b-s-steel-forge-co-v-shultz-ca9-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack