From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bush v. Leach

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Nov 1, 1927
22 F.2d 296 (2d Cir. 1927)

Opinion

No. 50.

November 1, 1927.

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

Action by William E. Bush and another, copartners doing business under the name of William E. Bush Co., and others, against Arthur B. Leach and C. Bruce Campbell, impleaded with others. An order dismissing the complaint as against the named defendants was rendered, and plaintiffs bring error. Dismissed.

A. Gordon Murray, of New York City (Charles H. Kelby and John B. Doyle, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs in error.

Elmer W. Maher, of New York City, appearing specially for defendants in error.

Before MANTON, L. HAND, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.


This appeal seeks to review an order which dismissed the complaint as against the individual defendants Arthur B. Leach and C. Bruce Campbell. No final judgment has been entered in the court below, as the action is still pending there and is undetermined as to A.B. Leach Co., Inc., and Philip J. Reilly. The appeal must be dismissed, upon the authority of Hohorst v. Hamburg Co., 148 U.S. 262, 13 S. Ct. 590, 37 L. Ed. 443; General Electric Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Co., 194 F. 413 (C.C.A. 3d); Electric Pro. Co. v. American Bank Pro. Co., 184 F. 924 (C.C.A. 8th); Cay v. Vereen, 144 F. 839 (C.C.A. 5th); Menge v. Warriner, 120 F. 816 (C.C.A. 5th).

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Bush v. Leach

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Nov 1, 1927
22 F.2d 296 (2d Cir. 1927)
Case details for

Bush v. Leach

Case Details

Full title:BUSH et al. v. LEACH et al

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Nov 1, 1927

Citations

22 F.2d 296 (2d Cir. 1927)

Citing Cases

Zarati S.S. Co. v. Park Bridge Corporation

With this unsettling of the law, I fear we are inviting piecemeal appeals and making the enforcement of the…

Vulcan Rivet Corporation v. Lawrence

The complaint need not set out in detail the specific acts constituting negligence. L. N. v. Marbury Lumber…