Document: 66 L.Ed.2d 193 101 S.Ct. 188 449 U.S. 33 ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION et al.,v.DAIFLON, INC. No. 79-1895. Nov. 17, 1980. PER CURIAM. 1 Respondent, Daiflon, Inc., is a small importer of refrigerant gas that brought an antitrust suit against all domestic manufacturers the gas. Petitioner E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. was accused monopolizing industry in violation § 2 Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 2. All petitioners were conspiring to drive respondent out business 1. After 4-week trial, jury returned verdict for and awarded $2.5 million damages. In subsequent oral order, trial court denied petitioners' motion judgment notwithstanding verdict, but granted new trial. The acknowledged its order it had erred during certain evidentiary rulings evidence did not support amount award. 3 Respondent then filed petition writ mandamus with Court Appeals Tenth Circuit, 612 F.2d 1249, requesting instruct reinstate verdict. Appeals, without transcript proceedings before it,1 issued directing restore as liability permitting proceed on Inc. v. Bohanon, F.d 1249. Petitioners seek review this action by their certiorari Court. 4 An granting interlocutory nature therefore immediately appealable. question presented whether litigant may obtain concededly appealable way mandamus. If such permissible additional would be facts particular case warrant issuance writ. 5 It disputed remedy drastic one, invoked only extraordinary situations. Will United States, 389 90, 95, 88 269, 273, 19 305, (1967); Bankers Life Cas. Holland, 346 379, 382-385, 74 142, 149, 98 L.Ed. 106, (1953); Ex parte Fahey, 332 258, 259, 67 1558, 1559, 91 2041, (1947). On direct appeal from final decision, appeals has broad authority "modify, vacate, set aside or reverse" district court, further remand "as just under circumstances." 28 2106. By contrast, Writs 1651(a), courts issue when "necessary appropriate aid respective jurisdictions." Although simple showing error suffice reversal appeal, circumstances "would undermine settled limitations upon power appellate orders." supra, at 98, n.6, S.Ct., 275, n.6. 6 This recognized "has traditionally been used federal 'to confine inferior lawful exercise prescribed jurisdiction compel duty do so.' " U.S., quoting Roche Evaporated Milk Assn., 319 21, 26, 63 938, 941, 87 1185 (1943). Only exceptional circumstances, amounting judicial usurpation power, will justify invocation remedy. 273. 7 reasons Court's chary authorization have often explained. See Kerr States District Court, 426 394, 402-403, 96 2119, 2123-2124, 48 725 (1976). Its use unfortunate consequence making judge litigant, indisputably contributes piecemeal litigation. Congress' determination since Judiciary Act 1789 general rule should postponed until after rendered court. A readiness anything less than situation "run real risk defeating very policies sought furthered Congress." Id., 403, 2124. insure required party seeking no other adequate means attain relief he desires, ibid.; satisfy "burden [his] right 'clear indisputable.' 384, 148, Duell, 172 576, 582, 286, 287, 43 559 (1899). short, our cases answered availability situations refrain: "What never? Well, hardly ever!" 8 court's ordering rarely, if ever, contrary, uncommon feature any which goes free propriety entered. Consequently, cannot said desires." grant moreover, confided almost entirely discretion part Where matter committed discretion, litigant's result "clear indisputable." Calvert Fire Ins. Co., 437 655, 666, 2552, 2559, 57 504 (1978) (plurality opinion). 9 To overturn undermines policy review. Under rationale employed discretionary regardless nature, subject immediate review.2 Such obviously encroaches conflicting review, leave mercy chose disregard it.3 10 granted, 11 Reversed. 12 Justice STEWART STEVENS took consideration decision case. 13 BLACKMUN, whom WHITE joins, dissenting. 14 I quarrel principles enunciated per curiam opinion. Of course, sense, however, rather voluminous material us (as contrasted average certiorari), Appeals' careful law decided concerning unusual there well more here appears first glance. decide, peremptorily summarily, what any, trial.* Instead, give plenary so we examine carefully factors considerations prompted feel deserves least much. request each prepare summary objected procedure substituted prepared lieu transcript. opinion eventually summarized testimony one witness unaware identity of, given by, witness. worth noting does present instance felt new-trial common-law Kanatser Chrysler Corp., 199 610 (CA10 1952), reached same certiorari. Even entered appear likely candidate. enter supporting findings conclusions motion. Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 52(a). contended certainty case, entering intended forth every reason order. note, made errors admission documentary received fair Given complete it, see n.1, could unarticulated bases seem impossible hold clearly abused * extent based inadequacy record proper record.

Category: 8