Zamore v. Goldblatt

Second Circuit

Zamore v. Goldblatt

201 F.2d 738, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2358

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided February 5, 1953·No. 153, Docket 22557·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The first question, although neither party considered it in the briefs, is as to the appealability of the order. City of Morgantown v. Royal Ins. Co., Ltd., 337 U.S. 254, 69 S.Ct. 1067, 93 L.Ed. 1347, is flat against appealability. So appellants’ attorney has admitted in his letter to the court submitted after the argument. This letter asks us to treat the appeal as a petition for mandamus. In Magnetic Engineering & Mfg. Co. v. Dings Mgf. Co., 2 Cir., 178 F.2d 866 at page 869, we said: “In this circuit we have twice refused to accept an appeal as a substitute for a petition for mandamus, even when that remedy was applicable ; and we shall abide by that ruling.”

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The first question, although neither party considered it in the briefs, is as to the appealability of the order. City of Morgantown v. Royal Ins. Co., Ltd., 337 U.S. 254, 69 S.Ct. 1067, 93 L.Ed. 1347, is flat against appealability. So appellants’ attorney has admitted in his letter to the court submitted after the argument. This letter asks us to treat the appeal as a petition for mandamus. In Magnetic Engineering & Mfg. Co. v. Dings Mgf. Co., 2 Cir., 178 F.2d 866 at page 869, we said: “In this circuit we have twice refused to accept an appeal as a substitute for a petition for mandamus, even when that remedy was applicable ; and we shall abide by that ruling.”

Appeal dismissed.

Zamore v. Goldblatt, 201 F.2d 738, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2358 (2d Cir. 1953).

Pincite

201 F.2d 738 (Zamore v. Goldblatt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related