Nolfi v. Chrysler Corp.

Third Circuit

Nolfi v. Chrysler Corp.

324 F.2d 373, 7 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 869

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedNovember 7, 1963

DocketNo. 14409

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 324 F.2d 373 (Nolfi v. Chrysler Corp.) 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

Nolfi v. Chrysler Corp., 324 F.2d 373, 7 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 869 (3d Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mt. Lebanon Motors, Inc., a third-party defendant in two separate civil actions arising out of the same automobile accident, has appealed from an order of the district court denying its motion to consolidate the actions. The appeal must be dismissed, for the order denying consolidation is clearly interlocutory in character, see Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Miller Mfg. Co., 276 F.2d 955 (C.A. 6, 1960); Skirvin v. Mesta, 141 F.2d 668, 671-672 (C.A. 10, 1944); 5 Moore’s Federal Practice 1204, and is not within that class of interlocutory orders made appealable by 28 U.S.C. § 1292. Nor does the instant order involve rights so separable from and collateral to rights asserted in the principal actions as to make it appealable under the doctrine of Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Compare, McAlister v. Guterma, 263 F.2d 65 (C.A.2, 1958).

The appeal will be dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mt. Lebanon Motors, Inc., a third-party defendant in two separate civil actions arising out of the same automobile accident, has appealed from an order of the district court denying its motion to consolidate the actions. The appeal must be dismissed, for the order denying consolidation is clearly interlocutory in character, see Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Miller Mfg. Co., 276 F.2d 955 (C.A. 6, 1960); Skirvin v. Mesta, 141 F.2d 668, 671-672 (C.A. 10, 1944); 5 Moore’s Federal Practice 1204, and is not within that class of interlocutory orders made appealable by 28 U.S.C. § 1292. Nor does the instant order involve rights so separable from and collateral to rights asserted in the principal actions as to make it appealable under the doctrine of Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Compare, McAlister v. Guterma, 263 F.2d 65 (C.A.2, 1958).

The appeal will be dismissed.

American Employers' Insurance Company v. King Resources Company, Harold Bottger v. King Resources Company, the Dietrich Corporation v. King Resources Company, Gross v. Blyth & Co., Inc., Morrell v. John M. King, in the Matter of King Resources Company. John M. King v. Charles A. Baer, Trustee, in the Matter of John McCandish King. John M. King v. Virgil Peter Cline, Trustee, in the Matter of the Colorado Corporation. John M. King v. William C. Lam, Trustee, in the Matter of Imperial-American Resources, Fund, Inc. John M. King v. Theodore H. Frison, Trustee

545 F.2d 1265 (Tenth Circuit, 1976)

Gavlik Construction Co. v. H. F. Campbell Co.

526 F.2d 777 (Third Circuit, 1975)

Katz v. Realty Equities Corp. of New York

521 F.2d 1354 (Second Circuit, 1975)

George Katz v. Realty Equities Corporation of New York, and Klein, Hinds & Finke and Alexander Grant & Company, Kenneth I. Herman, Trustee F/b/o Sheril Esta Kupfer v. Republic National Life Insurance Company, and Klein, Hinds & Finke and Alexander Grant & Company

521 F.2d 1354 (Second Circuit, 1975)

United States v. Fort Sill Apache Tribe

507 F.2d 861 (Court of Claims, 1974)

Elissa Nolfi, a Minor, by Philomena Nolfi Mangine, Her Guardian and Philomena Nolfi Mangine, in Her Own Right, and Richard Reading v. Chrysler Corporation, a Corporation, and Third-Party v. Mary Ducsay, Formerly Mary Drain, and Alex Drain, and Mt. Lebanon Motors, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corp., Third-Party Mary Ducsay, Formerly Mary Drain, and Alex Drain, Individuals v. Chrysler Corporation, a Corporation, and Third-Party v. Mt. Lebanon Motors, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation, Third-Party Mt. Lebanon Motors, Inc.

324 F.2d 373 (Third Circuit, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 F.2d 373, 7 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nolfi-v-chrysler-corp-ca3-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack