Standard Asbestos Manufacturing and Insulating Company v. United States

Fifth Circuit

Standard Asbestos Manufacturing and Insulating Company v. United States

676 F.2d 119, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19615

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 30, 1982

Docket82-9052

StatusPublished

This text of 676 F.2d 119 (Standard Asbestos Manufacturing and Insulating Company v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Standard Asbestos Manufacturing and Insulating Company v. United States, 676 F.2d 119, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19615 (5th Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED that leave to take an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) from the order of the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas entered on February 22, 1982, is denied as unnecessary. The order from which interlocutory appeal is sought is, under the circumstances, a final, appealable order. See United States v. United Fruit Co., 410 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1969); United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Industries, 517 F.2d 826, 840-41 (5th Cir. 1975); In re Proceedings Before Federal Grand Jury, 643 F.2d 641, 643 (9th Cir. 1981); Gibson v. United States, 403 F.2d 166 (D.C.Cir.1968); State of Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 889, 98 S.Ct. 262, 54 L.Ed.2d 174 (1977).

The motion for leave to take an interlocutory appeal will be treated as a notice of appeal. See Cobb v. Lewis, 488 F.2d 41, 44-46 (5th Cir. 1974). The appeal may be docketed, subject to compliance with any other applicable requirements.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to consolidate this case with Myers v. Johns-Manvilie Sales Corp., et al., etc., No. 82-9049, for purposes of the appeals in such cases is granted.

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

BY THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED that leave to take an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) from the order of the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas entered on February 22, 1982, is denied as unnecessary. The order from which interlocutory appeal is sought is, under the circumstances, a final, appealable order. See United States v. United Fruit Co., 410 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1969); United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Industries, 517 F.2d 826, 840-41 (5th Cir. 1975); In re Proceedings Before Federal Grand Jury, 643 F.2d 641, 643 (9th Cir. 1981); Gibson v. United States, 403 F.2d 166 (D.C.Cir.1968); State of Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 889, 98 S.Ct. 262, 54 L.Ed.2d 174 (1977).

The motion for leave to take an interlocutory appeal will be treated as a notice of appeal. See Cobb v. Lewis, 488 F.2d 41, 44-46 (5th Cir. 1974). The appeal may be docketed, subject to compliance with any other applicable requirements.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to consolidate this case with Myers v. Johns-Manvilie Sales Corp., et al., etc., No. 82-9049, for purposes of the appeals in such cases is granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

676 F.2d 119, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standard-asbestos-manufacturing-and-insulating-company-v-united-states-ca5-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack