Pierce v. National Bank of Commerce
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtTrieber, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). As the order of the court striking out parts of the cross-complaint of appellant was not final, it is not appealable, and cannot be considered on this appeal, as section 129 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. § 1121) applies only to injunctions “granted, continued, refused, or dissolved, * * * or an application to dissolve an injunction shall be refused.” Ayres v. Carver, 17 How. (58 U. S.) 591, 15 L. Ed. 179; 3 C. J. 448. Prior to the enactment of this section by the Act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat 828, and subsequent amendments, no appeal could be taken from…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Simon v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Marshall v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Julian v. Central Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Barber Asphalt Pav. Co. v. MorrisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Boatmen's Bank v. FritzlenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- City and County of San Francisco v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- National Bank of Commerce v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1925
- Pioneer Grain Corp. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
- States v. BroudeDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1924
- United States ex rel. Marks v. BrooksDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1940