Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Epton v. Hogan

Epton v. Hogan, 355 F.2d 203 (2d Cir. 1966)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1966-01-14
Topic: labor-and-employment

PER CURIAM. Appellants’ complaint, concerning the alleged unconstitutionality of New York Penal Law § 161 and other statutes, was dismissed with leave to amend. An order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend is not a final order and therefore not appealable. See Oppenheimer v. F.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Epton v. Hogan. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 6 opinions

EPTON v. HOGAN,355 F.2d 203(2nd Cir. 1966)

William EPTON et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Frank HOGAN et al.,

Respondents-Appellees.

No. 194, Docket 29941.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued December 16, 1965.

Decided January 14, 1966.

Len Holt, Washington, D.C. (J.A. Jordan, Jr., Norfolk, Va., on the brief), for appellants.

Joel Lewittes, Asst. Atty. Gen. of State of New York (Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of State of New York, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Mortimer Sattler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Iris A. Steel, Deputy Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), for appellees.

Before WATERMAN, KAUFMAN and HAYS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants' complaint, concerning the alleged unconstitutionality of New York Penal Law § 161 and other statutes, was dismissed with leave to amend. An order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend is not a final order and therefore not appealable. See Oppenheimer v. F.J. Young Co., Inc.,144 F.2d 387(2d Cir. 1944); American Broadcasting Co. v. Wahl Co.,121 F.2d 412(2d Cir. 1941); 6 Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 54.12[1] at 116 (1953).

Appeal dismissed.