DIKEMAN v. JEWEL GOLD MINING CO.

No. 4271.

2 F.2d 665 (1924)

DIKEMAN et al. v. JEWEL GOLD MINING CO. et al.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

November 17, 1924.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Arthur Frame, of Anchorage, Alaska, and Walter Christie, of San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiffs in error.

W. H. Rager, of Anchorage, Alaska, for defendants in error.

Before GILBERT, HUNT, and RUDKIN, Circuit Judges.


HUNT, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).

By the assignments plaintiffs in error ask a review of the order of the court refusing to confirm the second sale and ordering it set aside. But a question of our jurisdiction at once arises, because, if that order was not a final one, we cannot take jurisdiction, and the only disposition to be made of the matter is to grant the motion of the defendant in error to dismiss the writ for lack of jurisdiction.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases