Schramm v. Murdock-Salyer Chevrolet Co.
This text of 312 F.2d 249 (Schramm v. Murdock-Salyer Chevrolet Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained because the record contains no final judgment disposing of the claim asserted by the appellants against the appellees. We suggest that on remand the district court reconsider its order on the motions to quash in the light of such decisions as Land v. Dollar, 330 U.S. 731, 735, 67 S.Ct. 1009, 91 L.Ed. 1209; and Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company v. Railway Express Agency, 6 Cir., 253 F.2d 780, 784; and in the light of the principles stated in 1A Barron & Holtzoff, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 355, p. 352; and 2 Moore’s Federal Practice, § 12.16, p. 222 of 1961 supplement. Time for appeal of any judgment entered after remand shall run from the entry of that judgment.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
312 F.2d 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schramm-v-murdock-salyer-chevrolet-co-ca10-1962.