In re Cogan

Second Circuit

In re Cogan

228 F. 192, 142 C.C.A. 548, 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2008

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedOctober 12, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 228 F. 192 (In re Cogan) 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

In re Cogan, 228 F. 192, 142 C.C.A. 548, 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2008 (2d Cir. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

When a party considers himself aggrieved by the action of a District Court or of a District Judge in granting or refusing an injunction, he may review such action by appeal. See section 129, Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1134 [Comp. St. 1913, § 1121]). Certiorari to review will not lie.

This certainly is not an appeal; indeed, the papers fail to indicate that suit in equity was ever brought. Apparently no process was ever served, and no bill of complaint was ever filed.

Motion denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

When a party considers himself aggrieved by the action of a District Court or of a District Judge in granting or refusing an injunction, he may review such action by appeal. See section 129, Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1134 [Comp. St. 1913, § 1121]). Certiorari to review will not lie.

This certainly is not an appeal; indeed, the papers fail to indicate that suit in equity was ever brought. Apparently no process was ever served, and no bill of complaint was ever filed.

Motion denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 F. 192, 142 C.C.A. 548, 1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 2008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cogan-ca2-1915.