Home/Fifth Circuit/Frank Honig v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, Inc.

Frank Honig v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, Inc.

404 F.2d 410, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 904
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedDecember 2, 1968
Docket25987
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 404 F.2d 410 (Frank Honig v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, Inc.) 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
Frank Honig v. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, Inc., 404 F.2d 410, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 904 (5th Cir. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal by a witness not a party to the principal lawsuit, from an order of the trial court requiring him to submit to further examination by deposition. We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed under the general rule that a discovery order incident to a pending action is not subject to appeal. See 6 Moore, Federal Practice, Sec. 54.07, and cases cited. This is not a final order, and we find no facts in the record that would warrant our invoking the exception to the rule as outlined in Overby v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., (5 Cir. 1955) 224 F.2d 158.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

Related

Maria Cazorla v. Koch Foods of Mississippi, LLC
Fifth Circuit, 2017
United States v. Frye
385 F. App'x 370 (Fifth Circuit, 2010)
Goodman v. Harris County
443 F.3d 464 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
Newby v. Enron Corp.
443 F.3d 416 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
A-Mark Auction Galleries, Inc. v. American Numismatic Ass'n
233 F.3d 895 (Fifth Circuit, 2000)
Mississippi Chemical v. Terra International
Fifth Circuit, 1998
Texaco Inc. v. Louisiana Land and Exploration Co., State of Louisiana, Department of Natural Resources, and the State Mineral Board
995 F.2d 43 (Fifth Circuit, 1993)
Periodical Publishers Service Bureau, Inc. v. Keys
981 F.2d 215 (Fifth Circuit, 1993)
Micro Motion Incorporated v. Exac Corporation, Defendant-Intervenor v. Smith Meter, Incorporated
876 F.2d 1574 (Federal Circuit, 1989)
In Re Donald J. Willy
831 F.2d 545 (Fifth Circuit, 1987)
In Re Margarito Reyes
814 F.2d 168 (Fifth Circuit, 1987)
Robinson v. Tanner
798 F.2d 1378 (Eleventh Circuit, 1986)
Cronin v. Strayer
467 N.E.2d 143 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1984)
M. Aschheim Co. v. Turkanis
458 N.E.2d 743 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1983)
Gideon Ariel and Irving I. Dardik, U.S. Olympic Committee v. Arthur Jones, an Individual and D/B/A Nautilus Sports/medical Industries
693 F.2d 1058 (Eleventh Circuit, 1982)
In Re Tom Rubin, D/B/A Tom Rubin & Associates, Movant-Appellant
679 F.2d 29 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
In Re Edward James Sessions
672 F.2d 564 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
Charles Baker v. F & F Investment
470 F.2d 778 (Second Circuit, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
404 F.2d 410, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-honig-v-e-i-dupont-de-nemours-company-inc-ca5-1968.