TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ace Grain Co. v. American Eagle Fire Ins.

ACE GRAIN CO., Inc. v. AMERICAN EAGLE FIRE INS. CO. OF NEW YORK

Ace Grain Co. v. Am. Eagle Fire Ins., 11 F.R.D. 164 (S.D.N.Y. 1951)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court, S.D. New York · Federal District Courts
Decided
April 5, 1951
Judges
McGohey
Citations
11 F.R.D. 1641951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3570

Opinion of the Court — McGohey

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

McGOHEY, District Judge.

By order dated February 26, 1951, I provided that defendant Rhode Island ig required to post a bond or other security as a condition precedent to filing an answer in this suit. An appeal from that order has been dismissed on the ground that the order, being interlocutory, is not *165 appealable. Rhode Island then moved before me for a certificate pursuant to Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. rule 54(b), 28 U.S.C.A. that the order in so far as it requires a bond is final and that there is no just reason for delay in having it reviewed by the Court of Appeals.

Prof. Moore is of the view that the purpose of the rule is to empower the District Judge, presumably familiar with the litigation, to determine “when one branch of it * * * is * * * ripe for appellate review.” * That -appears to be so.

While I do not agree with Rhode Island;s contention that I lacked authority to require the bond, I do agree that the order is as final on that point now as it ever will be. Accordingly, I think that Rhode Island should have an opportunity now to seek review of that portion of my order of February 26, 1951, which requires Rhode Island to post a bond or other security as a condition to filing an answer in this suit.

Submit appropriate certificate.

Moore’s Commentary on the Judicial Code 517.

How later courts describe this case

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

1951: 219512026peak 1951 · 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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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