California National Bank v. Stateler/Opinion of the Court

by Henry Billings Brown

United States Supreme Court

171 U.S. 447

California National Bank  v.  Stateler

Motion is made to dismiss this writ of error, upon the ground that no federal question is involved in the case.

Without, however, expressing an opinion upon this, we think the case will have to be dismissed, upon the ground that the order appealed from is not a final order, within the decisions of this court. The affidavit of Stateler, which is the basis of this preceeding, sets forth not only the payment of $27,500 in cash by Thompson and Wilson, but avers upon information and belief that there was also transferred to the plaintiff, by said defendants, a large block of stock belonging to them in the California National Bank, which is the property of its stockholders; and the prayer is for an order turning over to the petitioner the moneys above mentioned, and 'all stock and other securities, of every sort, nature, and description, received by him from defendants Thompson and Wilson in this action.'

While the opinion of the court deals only with the moneys paid by Thompson and Wilson, the order appealed from directs the trial court to enter the order prayed for, 'after making reasonable allowances to the plaintiff Chetwood for his costs, disbursements, and attorney's fees in said action as contemplated by law.' This order lacks finality in two particulars. It would still be competent to prove that Chetwood had received the block of stock set up in Stateler's affidavit, and it would certainly be necessary for Chetwood to prove up his costs, disbursements, and attorney's fees before the amount for which he is ultimately made liable could be ascertained.

The settled rule is that if a superior court makes a decree fixing the liability and rights of the parties, and refers the case to a master or subordinate court for a judicial purpose, such, for instance, as a statement of account upon which a further decree is to be entered, the decree is not final. Craighead v. Wilson, 10 How. 199; Beebe v. Russell, 19 How. 283; Iron Co. v. Martin, 132 U.S. 91, 10 Sup. Ct. 32; Lodge v. Twell, 135 U.S. 232, 10 Sup. Ct. 745; McGourky v. Railway Co., 146 U.S. 536, 13 Sup. Ct. 170; Insurance Co. v. Kirchoff, 160 U.S. 374, 16 Sup. Ct. 318; Hollander v. Fechheimer, 162 U.S. 326, 16 Sup. Ct. 795.

The writ of error is therefore dismissed.

Notes