Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Mr. Richard B. Montgomery, of New Orleans, La., for appellant.
Mr. Walter Carroll, of New Orleans, La., for appellees.
Mr. Justice BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The owners of the steamship Nyanza filed in the federal court for Eastern Louisiana, against Jahncke Dry Dock No. 1 and the owners thereof a single libel, setting forth these four causes of action: In rem for salvage, in personam for salvage, in rem for damage from collision, and in personam for such damage. The owners appeared as claimants. Excepting to the libel, they prayed that, 'in so far as the action is either in rem or in personam for salvage and in rem for damage,' it be dismissed for want of admiralty jurisdiction. The court maintained the exception, entered a decree of dismissal precisely as prayed for, and allowed an appeal under section 238 of the Judicial [264 U.S. 439, 440] Code (Comp. St. 1215), with a certificate that 'in this decree the question of jurisdiction alone is in issue.'
The decree leaves the cause of action in personam for damage undisposed of. For this reason the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction in this court, although the objection was not taken by the appellee. This court has jurisdiction under section 238, as under others, only of writs of error or appeals from final judgments. And the judgment must be, not only in its nature final, but a complete disposition of the cause. Collins v. Miller, 252 U.S. 364, 370 , 40 S. Sup. Ct. 347. This rule is applicable to appeals in admiralty. Bowker v. United States, 186 U.S. 135 , 22 Sup. Ct. 802; Oneida Nav. Corporation v. W. & S. Job Co., 252 U.S. 251 , 40 Sup. Ct. 357. There is nothing to the contrary in Withenbury v. United States, 5 Wall. 819, or in The Pesaro, 255 U.S. 216, 217 , 41 S. Sup. Ct. 308. Counsel suggested that the dismissal of this premature appeal might somehow release the dry dock, to libelant's prejudice. It obviously cannot have that effect.
Dismissed.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Citation: 264 U.S. 439
Docket No: No. 307
Argued: March 06, 1924
Decided: April 07, 1924
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)