Carl Thaysen v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company

Third Circuit

Carl Thaysen v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company

329 F.2d 149, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6030

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 16, 1964·No. 14698·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This civil action was removed to the federal district court from the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, in which it commenced. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1446. The appellant’s motion for remand was denied and the appellee was granted leave to amend the jurisdictional allegations of its petition for removal. The present appeal followed. The denial of a motion for remand, such as we have here, is not a final decision appealable under § 1291 of Title 28 U.S.C.A. Peterson v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, et al., 268 F.2d 567 (7th Cir. 1959); Wynn v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 212 F.2d 953 (9th Cir. 1954); Tinkoff v. Holly, 209 F.2d 527 (7th Cir. 1954); Lewis v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 183 F.2d 29, 21 A.L.R.2d 757 (5th Cir. 1950). As an interlocutory decision it is not within the category of those orders appealable under § 1292 of Title 28 U.S.C.A.

The appeal will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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

PER CURIAM.

This civil action was removed to the federal district court from the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, in which it commenced. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1446. The appellant’s motion for remand was denied and the appellee was granted leave to amend the jurisdictional allegations of its petition for removal. The present appeal followed. The denial of a motion for remand, such as we have here, is not a final decision appealable under § 1291 of Title 28 U.S.C.A. Peterson v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, et al., 268 F.2d 567 (7th Cir. 1959); Wynn v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 212 F.2d 953 (9th Cir. 1954); Tinkoff v. Holly, 209 F.2d 527 (7th Cir. 1954); Lewis v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 183 F.2d 29, 21 A.L.R.2d 757 (5th Cir. 1950). As an interlocutory decision it is not within the category of those orders appealable under § 1292 of Title 28 U.S.C.A.

The appeal will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Carl Thaysen v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, 329 F.2d 149, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6030 (3d Cir. 1964).

Pincite

329 F.2d 149 (Carl Thaysen v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related