Dye v. Farm Mortgage Inv. Co. of Topeka

70 F.2d 514, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4206
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
DecidedApril 23, 1934
DocketNo. 1012
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 70 F.2d 514 (Dye v. Farm Mortgage Inv. Co. of Topeka) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dye v. Farm Mortgage Inv. Co. of Topeka, 70 F.2d 514, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4206 (10th Cir. 1934).

Opinion

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.

On the 30th day of June, 1933, the court entered an order sustaining a demurrer to the amended petition and giving the plaintiffs 15 days to file a second amended petition. On July 8, 1933, the plaintiffs filed a second amended petition. On the 31st day of October, 1933, the court entered an order striking the second amended petition from the files.

The plaintiffs have undertaken to appeal from the last-mentioned order. Such order was in effect an order sustaining a demurrer to the amended petition. See AEtna Life [515]*515Ins. Co. v. Phillips (C. C. A. 10) 69 F.(2d) 901 (decided March 21, 1934).

No judgment was entered dismissing either the amended petition or the second amended petition.

It is well settled that an order sustaining a demurrer to a petition is not a final order within the meaning of 28 USCA § 225. Dyar v. McCandless (C. C. A. 8) 33 F.(2d) 578; Missouri & K. I. Ry. Co. v. Olathe, 222 U. S. 185, 32 S. Ct. 46, 56 L. Ed. 155; Darling Lumber Co. v. Porter (C. C. A. 5) 256 F. 455. The proper procedure is for the plaintiffs to elect to stand upon their petition and to let a final judgment of dismissal be entered against them. An appeal will then lie from such final order and the ruling on the demurrer may be reviewed.

The order sought to be appealed from here not being a final order, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and it is therefore dismissed.

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

Related

Crutcher v. Joyce
134 F.2d 809 (Tenth Circuit, 1943)
Smyth v. United States
87 F.2d 1017 (Tenth Circuit, 1937)
Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Banion
86 F.2d 886 (Tenth Circuit, 1936)
Demulso Corporation v. Tretolite Co.
74 F.2d 805 (Tenth Circuit, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 F.2d 514, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dye-v-farm-mortgage-inv-co-of-topeka-ca10-1934.