1. This Court has no jurisdiction to consider an appeal from a
judgment of the Court of Claims acquiring finality subsequently
to
Page 270 U. S. 104
the going into effect of the Act of February 13, 1925, c. 229,
43 Stat. 936, which limited the method of review by this Court of
final judgment in the Court of Claims to writ of certiorari. P.
270 U. S.
106.
2. A judgment of the Court of Claims entered before May 13,
1925, the effective date of the above Act, but suspended by a
motion for new trial which was denied after that date, was not
appealable.
Id.
Appeal from 60 Ct.Cls. 662 dismissed; certiorari granted.
Motion to dismiss an appeal from the Court of Claims in an
action brought by the railroad company to recover compensation for
transportation of impedimenta carried with troop trains of the
United States. A writ of certiorari had been applied for in due
time, and is granted.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Southern Pacific Company filed a petition in the Court of
Claims seeking to recover compensation for the transportation of
impedimenta carried with troop trains of the United States. It
asked for a judgment of $42,734.97. After a hearing on the
evidence, the Court of Claims gave judgment for the company in the
sum of $498.38. This judgment was entered May 11, 1925. On July 10,
1925, the plaintiff filed motion for a new trial which, on October
26, 1925, the court denied. On October 28, 1925, the company filed
a petition for an appeal, which was allowed by the Court of Claims
on November 2, 1925.
A motion is now made by the United States to dismiss the appeal
on the ground that this Court was deprived of jurisdiction to
entertain appeals from the Court of
Page 270 U. S. 105
Claims by the act entitled "An Act to amend the Judicial Code,
and to further define the jurisdiction of the circuit courts of
appeals and of the Supreme Court, and for other purposes," approved
February 13, 1925 c. 229, 43 Stat. 936. Section 14 of that Act
provides:
"This Act shall take effect three months after its approval, but
it shall not affect cases then pending in the Supreme Court, nor
shall it affect the right to a review, or the mode or time for
exercising the same, as respects any judgment or decree entered
prior to the date when it takes effect."
The Act took effect May 13, 1925. The judgment from which an
appeal is sought was entered May 11, 1925, but the effect of that
judgment as a final judgment was suspended by the motion for a new
trial duly filed, within the rules of the court, on July 10, 1925.
This motion was not finally denied until October 26, 1925, and not
until then did the judgment become subject to review in this Court.
The general principle is well established by many decisions of this
Court, some of which are cited in
Morse v. United States,
post, p.
270 U. S. 151.
That the operation of the Act of February 13, 1925, does not change
the application of the principle appears clearly from the case of
Andrews v. Virginian Railway, 248 U.
S. 272. In that case, a suit for damages for wrongful
death was heard in a state circuit court of Virginia, and a
judgment rendered in favor of the defendant, June 16, 1916. A
petition for writ of error to review the judgment was presented to
the court of appeals and finally denied on November 13, 1916. On
November 27, 1916, a petition was presented to the presiding judge
of the state circuit court for the allowance of a writ of error
from this Court to review the judgment of that court of June 16,
1916, which was allowed, and the case was brought here. Between the
time of the rendition of the judgment in the state circuit court
and the denial of the petition for writ of error by the Court of
Appeals of Virginia, November 13, 1916, the Act of Congress of
Page 270 U. S. 106
September 6, 1916, c. 448, 39 Stat. 726, and been approved and
became operative October 6, 1916. In form, the judgment to which
the writ of error was addressed was rendered on June 16, 1916,
before the operation of the Act of the Congress, and it was argued
that the judgment was outside its provisions. The question
considered by the court was thus whether the judgment was a final
judgment at the date named, or became so only by the state court of
appeals declining in the exercise of its discretion to take
jurisdiction on November 13, 1916, after the passage of the new Act
of Congress. It was held that, though the action of the court of
appeals was the mere exercise of gracious or discretionary power,
neither imperative nor obligatory, the judgment of the circuit
court could not be regarded as final for the purpose of review in
this Court until after the exercise by the court of appeals of this
discretion. It was therefore held that the judgment of the state
circuit court, though rendered before the approval of the Act of
September 6, 1916, which took effect October 6, 1916, must be
regarded as not final with reference to the review by this Court
until the refusal of the Court of Appeals of Virginia to consider
the case on November 13, 1916. And so in this case. While the
judgment to which the appeal was allowed was actually entered two
days before the Act of Congress of February 13, 1925, went into
effect, the subsequent motion for a new trial of July 10, 1925,
seasonably filed, suspended the judgment of the Court of Claims as
a final judgment for purposes of review until the denial of the
motion for new trial in October, 1925. This Court therefore has no
jurisdiction to consider an appeal from a judgment acquiring
finality only in October after the going into effect of the Act of
February 13, 1925, which limited the method of review by this Court
of final judgments in the Court of Claims to writs of certiorari
after May 13, 1925. The motion to dismiss the appeal must be
granted. In the
Page 270 U. S. 107
meantime, and in due time, a petition for certiorari was filed,
which the court has considered, and does now grant, and the cause
is set for hearing on the summary docket for the 4th day of October
next.