Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Sol A. Dann, John H. Neville and Louise A. Turek v. Studebaker-Packard Corporation, Harold E. Churchill, Hugh J. Ferry and A. J. Porta

253 F.2d 28

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1958-02-20
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. It appearing to the Court from the record, the briefs and the oral argument of the parties that, as appellees concede, the order of the District Court dismissing appellants’ complaint as amended and supplemented, for non-compliance with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., was not a dismissal of the action and is not appeal-able, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and that appellants may yet file, by leave of Court pursuant to Rule 15, an amended complaint which will meet the requirements of Rule 8; It is ordered that the appeal is hereby dismissed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Sol A. Dann, John H. Neville and Louise A. Turek v. Studebaker-Packard Corporation, Harold E. Churchill, Hugh J. Ferry and A. J. Porta. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
9 opinions
DANN v. STUDEBAKER-PACKARD CORPORATION,253 F.2d 28(6th Cir. 1958)
Sol A. DANN, John H. Neville and Louise A. Turek, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v. STUDEBAKER-PACKARD CORPORATION, Harold E. Churchill, Hugh J. Ferry and
A.J. Porta, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13270.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
February 20, 1958.
Dann, Rosenbaum Bloom, Detroit, Mich., Sol A. Dann, Detroit, Mich., of counsel, for appellant.

Cravath, Swaine Moore, New York City, Bodman, Longley, Bogle, Armstrong Dahling, Detroit, Mich., White Case and Ralph L. McAfee, New York City, for appellees.
Before McALLISTER and STEWART, Circuit Judges, and MATHES, District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
It appearing to the Court from the record, the briefs and the oral argument of the parties that, as appellees concede, the order of the District Court dismissing appellants' complaint as amended and supplemented, for non-compliance with Rule8of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., was not a dismissal of the action and is not appealable,28 U.S.C. § 1291, and that appellants may yet file, by leave of Court pursuant to Rule 15, an amended complaint which will meet the requirements of Rule 8;

It is ordered that the appeal is hereby dismissed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.Page 111