Court Opinion

ID: 9443568
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 19:25:00.178145+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:29:32.385960
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
The first question, although neither party considered it in the briefs, is as to the appealability of the order. City of Morgantown v. Royal Ins. Co., Ltd., 337 U.S. 254, 69 S.Ct. 1067, 93 L.Ed. 1347, is flat against appealability. So appellants’ attorney has admitted in his letter to the court submitted after the argument. This letter asks us to treat the appeal as a petition for mandamus. In Magnetic Engineering & Mfg. Co. v. Dings Mgf. Co., 2 Cir., 178 F.2d 866 at page 869, we said: “In this circuit we have twice refused to accept an appeal as a substitute for a petition for mandamus, even when that remedy was applicable ; and we shall abide by that ruling.”
Appeal dismissed.