LOUISIANA BANK
v.
WHITNEY; BOARD OF LIQUIDATION OF NEW ORLEANS V. SAME
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Mrs. Myra Clark Gaines sought to attach $40,000 deposited in the Louisiana National Bank to satisfy a judgment against New Orleans, but the Board of Liquidation claimed the funds as part of a city debt liquidation appropriation. The Supreme Court dismissed appeals from an order placing the funds in the court's registry, holding that an order merely preserving disputed property pending litigation is interlocutory and not a final judgment reviewable on appeal or writ of error.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr.’Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a proceeding begun May 22, 1883, by Mrs. Myra Clark Gaines, then in life, to subject a certain sum of $40,000 on deposit in the Louisiana National Bank to the payment of a. judgment in her favor against the City of Npw Orleans. There is no dispute about the fact that the money in question was on deposit when the proceeding was begun and the bank served with process, but the Board of Liquidation of the City Debt has made claim to 'it as part of thé fund appropriated by Act No. 133 of 1880 to the payment and liquidation of the bonded debt of the city. Fendiñg the determination of the questions involved, the court, March 15, 1886, ordered the money paid into the registry of the court. From this order the bank has appealed, and also sued out a writ of error, and the Board of Liquidation has likewise appealed. The representatives of Mrs. Gaines, who were made parties to the proceeding after her death, now move to dismiss "both the writ of error and the appeals, because the order to be brought under review is not a final judgment or decree within the meaning of that term as used in the' acts of Congress giving-this court jurisdiction on appeals and writs of error. Wé have no hesitation in granting the motion. The court has not adjudicated the rights of the parties concerned. It has only ordered the fund into the registry of the court for preservation during the pendency of the litigation as to its ownership. Such an order it has always been held is interlocutory only and not a final decree. Forgay v. Conrad, 6 How. 204; Grant v. Phœnix Ins. Co., 106 U. S. 431. If in the end it shall be found that the fund belongs to the Board of Liquidation, it can be paid from the registry accordingly, notwithstanding the order that has been made. The money, when paid into the registry will be in the hands of the cqurt for the benefit of whomsoever it shall in the end be found to belong to.
Both the appeals and the writ of error arre dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Whitaker v. Sparkman, 30 Fla. 347 (Fla. 1892)
-
Luxton v. N. River Bridge Co., 147 U.S. 337 (U.S. 1893)…ion. The ease is not to be sent up in fragments by successive writs of error. Act of September 24, 1789, c. 20, § 22, 1 Stat. 84; Revi Stat. § 691; Rutherford v. Fisher, 4 Dall. 22 ; Holcombe v. McKusick, 20 How. 552, 554; Louisiana Bank v. Whitney, 121 U. S. 284; Keystone Co. v. Martin, 132 U. S. 91; McGourkey v. Toledo & Ohio Railway, 146 U. S. 536. As by the proceedings in the Circuit Court of the United States, in the case at bar, neither the title of the corporation in the land to be taken, nor the rig…
-
S. Ry. Co. v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co., 179 U.S. 641 (U.S. 1901)…tion. The case is not to be sent up in fragments by successive writs of error. Act of September 24, 1789, c. 20, § 22; 1 Stat. 84; Rev. Stat. § 691; Rutherford v. Fisher, 4 Dall. 22; Holcombe v. McKusick, 20 How. 552, 554; Louisiana Bank v. Whitney, 121 U. S. 284; Keystone Co. v. Martin, 132 U. S. 91; McGourkey v. Toledo & Ohio Railway, 146 U. S. 536.” Reference is made by counsel to Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co. v. Wheeling Bridge Co., 138 U. S. 287, in which this court sustained its jurisdiction of a writ…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence