TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

James A. Williams v. John E. Peters and Chester E. Strand

James A. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. John E. PETERS and Chester E. Strand, Appellees

Williams v. Peters, 233 F.2d 618 (9th Cir. 1956)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 8, 1956
Docket
No. 14998
Judges
Pope, Chambers, Boldt
Citations
233 F.2d 61816 Alaska 303

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order dismissing appellant’s complaint “for failing to state a cause of action.” Williams’ complaint alleged that defendants Peters and Strand, when called to testify in a certain criminal prosecution against him, each gave false and perjured testimony against Williams, thus bringing about his conviction.

The defendant Strand moved for summary judgment. To his order denying that motion, 1

the court added the order dismissing the complaint, from which appeal is now sought.

This court has frequently held that an order dismissing a complaint, without dismissing the action, is not an appeal-able order. Turnbull v. Cyr, 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 117 ; Blanco v. United States, 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 117 .

Cases may be found in which an order dismissing a complaint has been held final where it is clear that the court completely determined plaintiff has no right of action and plaintiff, by appealing, and not seeking leave to amend, was deemed to have elected to stand on his complaint. Asher v. Ruppa, 7 Cir., 173 F.2d 10 . And compare United States v. State of Arizona, 346 U.S. 907 , 74 S.Ct. 239 , 98 L.Ed. 405 , reversing this court’s decision at 9 Cir., 206 F.2d 159 .

We think that a fair interpretation of the court’s order is that it was not regarded by the trial court as a final decision, as in Asher v. Ruppa, supra; this for the reason that at the same time the court was denying the motion for summary judgment. Hence the order here involved was not appealable, and the appeal is dismissed, 1

. In Parker v. Title and Trust Co., 9 Cir., 233 F.2d 505 , this court applied the general rule that a witness may not be sued for damages on account of his false statements.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1956: 11957: 11958: 11959: 21961: 11962: 11964: 21966: 11968: 119562026peak 1959 · 2

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
Asher v. Ruppa, 173 F.2d 10 (7th Cir. 1949) 59
United States v. Arizona, 346 U.S. 907 (1953) 16
Shung v. Brownell, 346 U.S. 906 (1953) 20
United States v. Arizona, 206 F.2d 159 (9th Cir. 1953) 13
Turnbull v. Cyr, 184 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1950) 10
Blanco v. United States, 184 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1950) 5
Parker v. Title & Trust Co., a Corp., 233 F.2d 505 (9th Cir. 1956) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list