Andris v. Du Pont Cellophane Co.

ANDRIS v. DU PONT CELLOPHANE CO., Inc.

Andris v. Du Pont Cellophane Co., 93 F.2d 421 (7th Cir. 1937)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided: November 30, 1937
Docket: No. 6196
Judges: Evans
Citations: 93 F.2d 4211937 U.S. App. LEXIS 2826

Cited by 5

Opinion of the Court — Evans

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

EVANS, Circuit Judge.

On October 22, plaintiffs moved the District Court to vacate the order of September 23 which dismissed their action. On November 10, the District Court denied this motion to vacate the order of dismissal, and the appeal is from this order.

Defendant has moved this court to dismiss the appeal because the order appealed from is not appealable. This motion was denied without prejudice to its renewal at the time of the hearing on the merits.

The notice of appeal mentions only the order of November 10, which simply denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate the order of September 23. The assignments of error, however, allege as error the entry of the order of September 23 dismissing the bill of complaint.

The order from which this appeal is taken is not reviewable on appeal. It is < not appealable. Glinski v. United States (C.C.A.) 93 F.2d 418 , decided November 9, 1937; Smith v. U. S. ex rel. Gorlo (C.C.A.) 52 F.2d 848 .

Aside from this procedural difficulty, it is impossible to sustain plaintiffs’ contentions relative to their right to maintain a common law cause of action in Illinois for the contraction of an occupational disease in Illinois. The reasons which impelled the decisions of this court in McGuire v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 87 F.2d 112 ; Gestauts v. American Manganese Steel Co., 87 F.2d 1005 , are equally applica *422 ble in the instant case. The Supreme Court of the State of Illinois has spoken on this question, and. we are bound by its interpretation of the law. McCreery v. Libby-Owens-Ford Glass Co., 363 Ill. 321 , 2 N.E.(2d) 290, 105 A.L.R. 75 ; Vogel v. Johns-Manville Prod. Corp., 363 Ill. 473 , 2 N.E.(2d) 716; Boshuizen v. Thompson & Taylor Co., 360 Ill. 160 , 195 N.E. 625 .

The appeal is dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →

U.S. Courts of Appeals5

Relies on it most ⓘ

Mohonk Realty Corporation v. Wise Shoe Stores111 F.2d 287 (2d Cir. 1940)
Hack v. American Surety Co. of New York96 F.2d 939 (7th Cir. 1938)
Donovan v. Jeffcott147 F.2d 198 (9th Cir. 1945)
Bibo v. Burnett93 F.2d 946 (7th Cir. 1937)
Allen v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.96 F.2d 937 (7th Cir. 1938)

Most recent

Donovan v. Jeffcott147 F.2d 198 (9th Cir. 1945)
Mohonk Realty Corporation v. Wise Shoe Stores111 F.2d 287 (2d Cir. 1940)
Hack v. American Surety Co. of New York96 F.2d 939 (7th Cir. 1938)
Allen v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.96 F.2d 937 (7th Cir. 1938)
Bibo v. Burnett93 F.2d 946 (7th Cir. 1937)

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

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Boshuizen v. Thompson & Taylor Co., 195 N.E. 625 (Ill. 1935)	31
	Glinski v. United States, 93 F.2d 418 (7th Cir. 1937)	17
	Smith v. United States ex rel. Gorlo, 52 F.2d 848 (7th Cir. 1931)	15
	McCreery v. Libby-Owens-Ford Glass Co., 2 N.E.2d 290 (Ill. 1936)	9
	McGuire v. Sherwin-Willliams Co., 87 F.2d 112 (7th Cir. 1936)	4
	Vogel v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp., 2 N.E.2d 716 (Ill. 1936)	3
	Gestauts v. Am. Manganese Steel Co., 87 F.2d 1005 (7th Cir. 1937)	2

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list