International Terminal Operating Co. v. Waterman Steamship Co.

Second Circuit

International Terminal Operating Co. v. Waterman Steamship Co.

255 F.2d 657

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 20, 1958

DocketNo. 356, Docket 25058

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 F.2d 657 (International Terminal Operating Co. v. Waterman Steamship Co.) 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

International Terminal Operating Co. v. Waterman Steamship Co., 255 F.2d 657 (2d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In his judgment and order denying plaintiff reimbursement for compensation benefits paid its employee, the trial judge made clear that he was reserving for trial the defendant’s counterclaim for reimbursement of the sum it had paid in settlement of the employee’s claim against it for negligent injury. But he made no finding that “there is no just reason for delay” or direction for the entry of judgment, as required by Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. rule 54(b), to provide an appealable judgment. Apparently he concluded that a full trial was desirable before a final judgment should be entered. Accordingly the appeal must be dismissed for lack of an appealable judgment.

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

PER CURIAM.

In his judgment and order denying plaintiff reimbursement for compensation benefits paid its employee, the trial judge made clear that he was reserving for trial the defendant’s counterclaim for reimbursement of the sum it had paid in settlement of the employee’s claim against it for negligent injury. But he made no finding that “there is no just reason for delay” or direction for the entry of judgment, as required by Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. rule 54(b), to provide an appealable judgment. Apparently he concluded that a full trial was desirable before a final judgment should be entered. Accordingly the appeal must be dismissed for lack of an appealable judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 F.2d 657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-terminal-operating-co-v-waterman-steamship-co-ca2-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack