Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

228 F. 192

In re Cogan

Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided October 12, 1915.)

Second Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1915-10-12

<p>CERTIORARI <&wkey;5-NATURE AND GROUNDS-EXISTENCE OF REMEDY BY APPEAL.</p> <p>Certiorari will not lie to review the action of a District Court or judge in granting or refusing an injunction, which, is reviewable by appeal.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Certiorari, Cent. Dig. §§ 5, 6; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;5.]</p>

1 counsel of record

Application denied · Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1915-10-12

¶1CERTIORARI <&wkey;5-NATURE AND GROUNDS-EXISTENCE OF REMEDY BY APPEAL.

¶2Certiorari will not lie to review the action of a District Court or judge in granting or refusing an injunction, which, is reviewable by appeal.

¶3[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Certiorari, Cent. Dig. §§ 5, 6; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;5.]

¶4In the matter of the application of William H. Cogan for a writ of certiorari directed to the District Court of the United .States for the Southern District of New York.

¶5Application denied.

¶6Wm. H. Cogan, pro se.

¶7Before LACOMBE, COXE, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

¶8PER CURIAM.

¶9When a party considers himself aggrieved by the action of a District Court or of a District Judge in granting or refusing an injunction, he may review such action by appeal. See section 129, Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1134 [Comp. St. 1913, § 1121]). Certiorari to review will not lie.

¶10This certainly is not an appeal; indeed, the papers fail to indicate that suit in equity was ever brought. Apparently no process was ever served, and no bill of complaint was ever filed.

¶11Motion denied.

/228/f1d/192 · .json · Public domain