Legal Opinion
Zalkind v. Scheinman
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided December 10, 1943No. 94PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
1. Judge Bondy’s order was interlocutory and not appealable since it permitted plaintiff to amend. By amending, plaintiff did not lose his right to an appeal (if such right otherwise exists) from Judge Caffey’s subsequent order, of March 12, 1943, striking out a portion of the amended complaint. In considering that latter order, we shall deal with the amended complaint just as if it had been the original complaint. With respect to the appeal from that order, we face two questions which (as will appear from our discussion) are intertwined: a question of the jurisdiction of…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Railroad Comm'n of Tex. v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Burford v. Sun Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Hurn v. OurslerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Arnstein v. PorterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Brown v. BullockDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- John P. O'Brien v. Westinghouse Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- Walling v. Richmond Screw Anchor Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.