General
CONNOLLY v. BOUCK et al.
160 F. 1022·United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·1908
Before SANBORN and HOOK, Circuit Judges, and PHILIPS, District Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
CONNOLLY v. BOUCK et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
May 9, 1908.)
No. 2,498.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado.
Hugh Butler, for appellant. H. Riddell, for appellees.
Before SANBORN and HOOK, Circuit Judges, and PHILIPS, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The appeal in this case is dismissed, upon the ground that the decree which it challenges is an interlocutory and not a final decree, upon the authority of Railway Company v. Simmons, 123 U. S. 52, 8 Sup. Ct. 58, 31 L. Ed. 73, Parsons v. Robinson, 122 U. S. 112, 7 Sup. Ct. 1153, 30 L. Ed. 1122, Chase v. Driver, 92 Fed. 780, 783, 784, 34 C. C. A. 668, 671, 672, and the cases there cited.