Tracor, Inc. v. Premco Instruments, Inc.

Fifth Circuit

Tracor, Inc. v. Premco Instruments, Inc.

395 F.2d 849, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1043, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6620

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 7, 1968

Docket25230

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 395 F.2d 849 (Tracor, Inc. v. Premco Instruments, Inc.) 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

Tracor, Inc. v. Premco Instruments, Inc., 395 F.2d 849, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1043, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6620 (5th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

After briefs and oral argument, this interlocutory appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

The District Court directed an order to the clerk of a state court requesting that a sealed manila envelope in the custody of that official in connection with a state court ease (which had been settled and dismissed with prejudice) be forwarded to the clerk of the federal court and there held in secrecy pending further order. A motion for a stay was heard and denied. Appellant then undertook an appeal to this Court without a certificate of the District Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A., § 1292(b) and without applying to this Court within ten days of the order for leave to appeal.

We view this order as being, to all intents and purposes, no more than a subpoena duces tecum. The documents have been sent for in sealed form and ordered to be held that way. This was “only a step in the orderly procedure of the case”, it was not an injunction, and the order is therefore not appealable, O’Malley v. Chrysler Corp., 7 Cir., 1947, 160 F.2d 35.

Appellant’s motion for mandamus relief is denied.

Appeal dismissed and writ of mandamus denied.

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

PER CURIAM:

After briefs and oral argument, this interlocutory appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

The District Court directed an order to the clerk of a state court requesting that a sealed manila envelope in the custody of that official in connection with a state court ease (which had been settled and dismissed with prejudice) be forwarded to the clerk of the federal court and there held in secrecy pending further order. A motion for a stay was heard and denied. Appellant then undertook an appeal to this Court without a certificate of the District Judge under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A., § 1292(b) and without applying to this Court within ten days of the order for leave to appeal.

We view this order as being, to all intents and purposes, no more than a subpoena duces tecum. The documents have been sent for in sealed form and ordered to be held that way. This was “only a step in the orderly procedure of the case”, it was not an injunction, and the order is therefore not appealable, O’Malley v. Chrysler Corp., 7 Cir., 1947, 160 F.2d 35.

Appellant’s motion for mandamus relief is denied.

Appeal dismissed and writ of mandamus denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

395 F.2d 849, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1043, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 6620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tracor-inc-v-premco-instruments-inc-ca5-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack