Hirshhorn v. Mine Safety Appliances Co. Appeal of Behr

Third Circuit

Hirshhorn v. Mine Safety Appliances Co. Appeal of Behr

190 F.2d 675

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedJuly 10, 1951

Docket10435

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 190 F.2d 675 (Hirshhorn v. Mine Safety Appliances Co. Appeal of Behr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hirshhorn v. Mine Safety Appliances Co. Appeal of Behr, 190 F.2d 675 (3d Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Vladimir Behr and his wife sought to intervene as party-plaintiffs in this suit in the court below. The application was denied with prejudice and the Behrs appealed to this court. A motion to quash and dismiss the appeal was filed. At the argument upon this motion it was agreed by the parties, the complete record being before us, that the appeal should also be heard upon the merits. Both aspects of the case have been fully argued and briefed by the parties.

After careful consideration we have concluded that the motion to quash and dismiss the appeal should be denied for under the circumstances of this case the order denying intervention is an appealable order. Cf. Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528, and the authorities cited therein. The appeal itself, however, is without merit. The court below had the power to make the order complained of and we cannot say that in exercising that power it abused its discretion.

Accordingly the order will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Vladimir Behr and his wife sought to intervene as party-plaintiffs in this suit in the court below. The application was denied with prejudice and the Behrs appealed to this court. A motion to quash and dismiss the appeal was filed. At the argument upon this motion it was agreed by the parties, the complete record being before us, that the appeal should also be heard upon the merits. Both aspects of the case have been fully argued and briefed by the parties.

After careful consideration we have concluded that the motion to quash and dismiss the appeal should be denied for under the circumstances of this case the order denying intervention is an appealable order. Cf. Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528, and the authorities cited therein. The appeal itself, however, is without merit. The court below had the power to make the order complained of and we cannot say that in exercising that power it abused its discretion.

Accordingly the order will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 F.2d 675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hirshhorn-v-mine-safety-appliances-co-appeal-of-behr-ca3-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack