Epton v. Hogan

Second Circuit

Epton v. Hogan

355 F.2d 203

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJanuary 14, 1966

DocketNo. 194, Docket 29941

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 355 F.2d 203 (Epton v. Hogan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Epton v. Hogan, 355 F.2d 203 (2d Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants’ complaint, concerning the alleged unconstitutionality of New York Penal Law § 161 and other statutes, was dismissed with leave to amend. An order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend is not a final order and therefore not appealable. See Oppenheimer v. F. J. Young & Co., Inc., 144 F.2d 387 (2d Cir. 1944); American Broadcasting Co. v. Wahl Co., 121 F.2d 412 (2d Cir. 1941); 6 Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 54.12[1] at 116 (1953).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants’ complaint, concerning the alleged unconstitutionality of New York Penal Law § 161 and other statutes, was dismissed with leave to amend. An order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend is not a final order and therefore not appealable. See Oppenheimer v. F. J. Young & Co., Inc., 144 F.2d 387 (2d Cir. 1944); American Broadcasting Co. v. Wahl Co., 121 F.2d 412 (2d Cir. 1941); 6 Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 54.12[1] at 116 (1953).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

355 F.2d 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/epton-v-hogan-ca2-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack