Court Opinion

ID: 9842873
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 02:20:21.825476+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:01.431290
License: Public Domain

GIBSON, District Judge
(concurring).
I concur fully in Judge CLARK’S opinion dismissing these appeals. As a trial judge, I desire to point out that to follow the reasoning of the dissenting opinion will inevitably cause untold harm to one of the purposes causing the adoption of the Civil Rules of Federal Procedure. Rule 1, 28 U.S.C., in part, says: “They shall be construed to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action.” The cause of just, speedy and inexpensive justice will be set, far, far back if one construes these rules to enlarge the practice of piecemeal appeals. If one party can challenge the propriety of the other party’s attorney ■ — and such an order is held appealable, then that litigation must necessarily be delayed until this side question is passed on by the Appellate Court. The Trial Court is perfectly able to pass on any such question — and if required, can require new counsel to take over. The underlying philosophy of the minority opinion is to reinstate piecemeal appeals — that practice which still so dogs and delays and renders litigation expensive in many State Courts.