Robert M. Dailey and Fred J. Dailey v. David Lee Timmer and Robert Pakulski

292 F.2d 824, 4 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 974, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 3952
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided July 7, 1961·No. 13512·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial entered by a judge for the District Court for the V^estern District of Pennsylvania. Met with the statute 28 U.S.C. § 1291 which gives Courts of Appeals jurisdiction of all final decisions of District Courts (with certain exceptions not relevant here), the appellant urges upon us our own decision in Lind v. Schenley Industries, Inc., 3 Cir., 1960, 278 F.2d 79. That case has no bearing here. This Court, in that case, had jurisdiction because there was an appeal from a judgment N.O.Y. The new trial action was incidental to the main point.

The appeal will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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

Robert M. Dailey and Fred J. Dailey v. David Lee Timmer and Robert Pakulski, 292 F.2d 824, 4 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 974, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 3952 (3d Cir. 1961).

292 F.2d 824 (Robert M. Dailey and Fred J. Dailey v. David Lee Timmer and Robert Pakulski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Oertel v. Phillips
415 P.2d 223 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1966)
Conney v. Erickson
317 F.2d 247 (Seventh Circuit, 1963)