STANDARD ASBESTOS MANUFACTURING AND INSULATING COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT
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.
Leave to take an interlocutory appeal is denied because the order is final and appealable. The motion for leave to appeal will be treated as a notice of appeal.
The court considered a motion for leave to take an interlocutory appeal from an order entered by the United States District Court for the Eastern Dist…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Consolidation Of Appeals cases and more on FLexlaw
BY THE COURT:
IT IS ORDERED that leave to take an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) from the order of the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas entered on February 22, 1982, is denied as unnecessary. The order from which interlocutory appeal is sought is, under the circumstances, a final, appealable order. See United States v. United Fruit Co., 410 F. 2d 553 (5th Cir. 1969); United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Industries, 517 F. 2d 826, 840-41 (5th Cir. 1975); In re Proceedings Before Federal Grand Jury, 643 F. 2d 641, 643 (9th Cir. 1981); Gibson v. United States, 403 F. 2d 166 (D.C.Cir.1968); State of Illinois v. Sarbaugh, 552 F. 2d 768 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 889, 98 S.Ct. 262, 54 L.Ed.2d 174 (1977).
The motion for leave to take an interlocutory appeal will be treated as a notice of appeal. See Cobb v. Lewis, 488 F. 2d 41, 44-46 (5th Cir. 1974). The appeal may be docketed, subject to compliance with any other applicable requirements.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to consolidate this case with Myers v. Johns-Manvilie Sales Corp., et al., etc., No. 82-9049, for purposes of the appeals in such cases is granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Indus., Inc., 517 F.2d 826 (5th Cir. 1975)
- Cobb v. Lewis, 488 F.2d 41 (5th Cir. 1974)
- State OF Ill. v. Sarbaugh, 552 F.2d 768 (7th Cir. 1977)
- Gibson v. United States, 403 F.2d 166 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
- United States v. Scott, 434 U.S. 889 (U.S. 1977)
- Am. Inst. for Shippers' Assns., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n, 434 U.S. 889 (U.S. 1977)
- United States v. United Fruit Co., 410 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1969)
- In re Proceedings Before the Fed. Grand Jury FOR the Dist. OF Nev. United States v. Conforte, 643 F.2d 641 (9th Cir. 1981)