Essie H. Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co.

Fifth Circuit

Essie H. Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co.

273 F.2d 422, 2 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 808

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 30, 1959

Docket17755

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 273 F.2d 422 (Essie H. Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Essie H. Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co., 273 F.2d 422, 2 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 808 (5th Cir. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this suit under the Louisiana Direct Action Statute, the district court dismissed for want of jurisdiction the suit against Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Company as its policy limit ($5,000) was not sufficient to meet the $10,000 jurisdictional requirement of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(a) (1). As the case involved a single claim asserted against multiple defendants with the dismissal as to some leaving a suit remaining as to others, the order was interlocutory, not final, and the appeal must be dismissed. Reagan v. Traders & General Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 1958, 255 F.2d 845; Meadows v. Greyhound Corp., 5 Cir., 1956, 235 F.2d 233. This does not preclude the appellant from applying to the district court for an order permitting an appeal to be taken as is authorized by 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b). Ex parte Deepwater Exploration Co., 5 Cir., 1958, 260 F.2d 546; Ex parte Watkins, 5 Cir., 1958, 260 F.2& 548.

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this suit under the Louisiana Direct Action Statute, the district court dismissed for want of jurisdiction the suit against Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Company as its policy limit ($5,000) was not sufficient to meet the $10,000 jurisdictional requirement of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(a) (1). As the case involved a single claim asserted against multiple defendants with the dismissal as to some leaving a suit remaining as to others, the order was interlocutory, not final, and the appeal must be dismissed. Reagan v. Traders & General Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 1958, 255 F.2d 845; Meadows v. Greyhound Corp., 5 Cir., 1956, 235 F.2d 233. This does not preclude the appellant from applying to the district court for an order permitting an appeal to be taken as is authorized by 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b). Ex parte Deepwater Exploration Co., 5 Cir., 1958, 260 F.2d 546; Ex parte Watkins, 5 Cir., 1958, 260 F.2& 548.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 F.2d 422, 2 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/essie-h-jewell-v-grain-dealers-mutual-insurance-co-ca5-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack