Gumbel v. Pitkin
113 U.S. 545 (1885)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Gumbel v. Pitkin, 113 U.S. 545 (1885)

Gumbel v. Pitkin

Submitted January 26, 1885

Decided March 2, 1885

113 U.S. 545

Syllabus

A writ of error will not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction by reason of failure to return with it an assignment of errors. Ackley v. Hall,106 U. S. 428, affirmed.

When a third party intervenes in a pending suit to claim property in the custody of the marshal by virtue of a writ of attachment issued therein, a judgment dismissing his intervention is final as to that issue, and one distributing the proceeds of the property to other parties is also final.

When a writ of error gives the names of all parties as they are found in the record of the case in the court below, and there is nothing in the record to show that there were other parties, the writ is sufficient even if the defendants in error are there described by firm names, as A. B. & Co., &c. This case distinguished from The Protector, 11 Wall. 82.

Motion to dismiss and affirm. The grounds of the first motion were (1) that no copy of the writ had been lodged with

Page 113 U. S. 546

the clerk; (2) that no assignment of errors was transmitted with the record; (3) that the writ of error did not set forth the names of the members of the firms mentioned in the writ as defendants, and there was nothing in the record by which the irregularity could be corrected; (4) that the judgment appealed from was not a final judgment.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.