COLUMBIA BOILER CO. OF POTTSTOWN, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
HONORABLE STERLING HUTCHESON, DISTRICT JUDGE, EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, RESPONDENT, AND MANVILLE BOILER CO., INC., INTERVENOR
PER CURIAM.
This is a petition for a writ of prohibition in a patent infringement suit instituted against the Columbia Boiler Co. of Pottstown, Inc., and Columbia Boiler Co., Inc. The first named of these corporations moved to quash the service of process and to dismiss the suit on the ground that it does not reside or have a regular and established place of business within the Eastern District of Virginia. The judge below denied the motions on the basis of the holding in Dalton v. Shakespeare Co., 5 Cir., 196 F. 2d 469. It is admitted that the order denying the motions is not a final order and that petitioner cannot appeal from it. See Beury v. Beury, 4 Cir., 222 F. 2d 464; E.
I. Du Pont De Nemours Co., Inc., v. Hall, 4 Cir., 220 F. 2d 514. We think it equally clear that writ of prohibition cannot be used as substitute for an appeal in such a case. Until Congress amends the statute so as to permit appeals from interlocutory orders of this character, we do not think that appellate courts should attempt to circumvent the law by the use of writs of prohibition or mandamus. In re Sylvania Electric Products, Inc., 1 Cir., 220 F. 2d 423; Gulf Research & Development Co. v. Leahy, 3 Cir., 193 F. 2d 302, affirmed 344 U.S. 861, 73 S.Ct. 102, 97 L.Ed. 668; Gulf Research & Development Co. v. Harrison, 9 Cir., 185 F. 2d 457. Cf. C-O-Two Fire Equipment Co. v. Barnes, 7 Cir., 194 F. 2d 410, affirmed 344 U.S. 861, 73 S.Ct. 102, 97 L.Ed. 695.
Petition denied. [*719] l
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Clayton v. Honorable Wilson Warlick, 232 F.2d 699 (4th Cir. 1956)
-
S. Ry. Co. v. Madden, 224 F.2d 320 (4th Cir. 1955)
-
Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Sonenshine, 226 F.2d 220 (4th Cir. 1955)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Bell Aircraft Corp., 344 U.S. 860 (U.S. 1952)
- Gulf Research & Dev. Co. v. Leahy, 344 U.S. 861 (U.S. 1952)
- Gulf Research & Dev. Co. v. Leahy, 193 F.2d 302 (3d Cir. 1951)
- Lewis v. Times Pub. Co., 185 F.2d 457 (5th Cir. 1950)
- C-O-Two Fire Equip. Co. v. Barnes, 194 F.2d 410 (7th Cir. 1952)
- Gulf Research & Dev. Co. v. Harrison, 185 F.2d 457 (9th Cir. 1950)
- In re Sylvania Elec. Prods. Inc., 220 F.2d 423 (1st Cir. 1955)
- Dalton v. Shakespeare Co., 196 F.2d 469 (5th Cir. 1952)
- Beury v. Beury, 222 F.2d 464 (4th Cir. 1955)
- E. I. DU Pont de Nemours Co., Inc. v. Hall, 220 F.2d 514 (4th Cir. 1955)