History
  • No items yet
midpage
Eberhard F. Cimijotti v. Frances Paulsen, Clarice Sprout, Lauretta M. Cimijotti
323 F.2d 716
8th Cir.
1963
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The appeal is from an order of the District Court overruling motions to require some witnesses to answer certain questions asked of them in depositions taken by the plaintiff (here appellant) for discovery purposes under Rule 26(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. The defendants (here appellees) have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of a final order or judgment. The motion to dismiss is granted.

Rulings on the propriety or impropriety of incidents of deposition-taking under Rule 26 in a pending suit are not “final decisions” within the general right of appeal provided by 28 U.S. C.A. § 1291. Whatever practically may be their significance as a matter of discovery, they do not legally dispose of the issues of the case. Like other steps of preliminary progression, or like the incidents of a trial, they cannot be made the subject of review under § 1291, except after and in relation to the terminating order or judgment in the case. Cf. Alexander v. United States, 201 U.S. 117, 26 S.Ct. 356, 50 L.Ed. 686; Cobbledick v. United States, 309 U.S. 323, 60 S.Ct. 540, 84 L.Ed. 783; Thomas French & Sons v. International Braid Co., 1 Cir., 146 F.2d 735; Dille v. Carter Oil Co., 10 Cir., 174 F.2d 318.

Appeal dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Eberhard F. Cimijotti v. Frances Paulsen, Clarice Sprout, Lauretta M. Cimijotti
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Date Published: Oct 18, 1963
Citation: 323 F.2d 716
Docket Number: 17444_1
Court Abbreviation: 8th Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.