THE COLD METAL PROCESS COMPANY AND THE UNION NATIONAL BANK OF YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO, TRUSTEE,
v.
UNITED ENGINEERING & FOUNDRY COMPANY, APPELLANT
PER CURIAM.
The appellee in this case has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of United Engineering & Foundry Company on the ground that the judgment appealed from is not final. A similar motion was made on March 21, 1955, which was granted. The order granting the motion was made “without prejudice to the right of the District Court * * * to enter a final judgment therein in accordance with the provisions of Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [28 U.S. C.].”
Following this order United presented to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania a motion to vacate its judgment of January 19, 1955, and to enter judgment in accordance with Rule 54(b). This was done by the district court on March 30, 1955, after argument in open court. We think the determination made under the circumstances of this case is the very kind of thing Rule 54(b) was written to provide for. We see no violation of discretion on the part of the district judge in entering it.
The motion of the appellee to dismiss will, therefore, be denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Eng'g & Foundry Co., 351 U.S. 445 (U.S. 1956)
-
Ingram Corp. & Ingram Contractors, Inc. v. J. RAY McDERMOTT & Co., Inc., 698 F.2d 1295 (5th Cir. 1983)
-
Locafrance U. S. Corp. v. Intermodal Sys. Leasing, Inc., 558 F.2d 1113 (2d Cir. 1977)
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cold Metal Process Co. v. United Eng'g & Foundry Co., 190 F.2d 217 (3d Cir. 1951)