William R. Bennett v. Behring Corporation, a Delaware Corporation

Fifth Circuit

William R. Bennett v. Behring Corporation, a Delaware Corporation

525 F.2d 1202

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 16, 1976

Docket74--3055

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 525 F.2d 1202 (William R. Bennett v. Behring Corporation, a Delaware Corporation) 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

William R. Bennett v. Behring Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, 525 F.2d 1202 (5th Cir. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Behring Corporation, a real estate developer, appeals from an order of the district court granting class action certification under certain counts of a complaint against it, and defining the appropriate class and subclass. The district court denied appellant’s motion for certification pursuant to . 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), and appellant now seeks to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We have carefully considered the briefs, record, and contentions of the parties on oral argument. It is our conclusion that the order entered by the district court is not a final appealable order under § 1291 and that the appeal should be dismissed. See, e. g., Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975); Seiffer v. Topsy’s International, Inc., 520 F.2d 795 (10th Cir. 1974); In re Cessna Aircraft Distributorship Antitrust Litigation, White Industries, Inc. v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 518 F.2d 213 (8th Cir. 1975); General Motors Corp. v. City of New York, 501 F.2d 639 (2d Cir. 1974); Thill Securities Corp. v. New York Stock Exchange, 469 F.2d 14 (7th Cir. 1972); Walsh v. City of Detroit, 412 F.2d 226 (6th Cir. 1969).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Behring Corporation, a real estate developer, appeals from an order of the district court granting class action certification under certain counts of a complaint against it, and defining the appropriate class and subclass. The district court denied appellant’s motion for certification pursuant to . 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b), and appellant now seeks to appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

We have carefully considered the briefs, record, and contentions of the parties on oral argument. It is our conclusion that the order entered by the district court is not a final appealable order under § 1291 and that the appeal should be dismissed. See, e. g., Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975); Seiffer v. Topsy’s International, Inc., 520 F.2d 795 (10th Cir. 1974); In re Cessna Aircraft Distributorship Antitrust Litigation, White Industries, Inc. v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 518 F.2d 213 (8th Cir. 1975); General Motors Corp. v. City of New York, 501 F.2d 639 (2d Cir. 1974); Thill Securities Corp. v. New York Stock Exchange, 469 F.2d 14 (7th Cir. 1972); Walsh v. City of Detroit, 412 F.2d 226 (6th Cir. 1969).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

525 F.2d 1202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-r-bennett-v-behring-corporation-a-delaware-corporation-ca5-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack