Home - Site Index - Site Search/Archive - Help
Member Center - Log Out
|NYTimes.com > Washington|
222 U.S. 578
EX PARTE; IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE LEAF TOBACCO BOARD OF TRADE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Petitioner.
No. ___, Original.
Supreme Court of the United States
December 11, 1911[ In re Leaf Tobacco Board of Trade of the City of New York 222 U.S. 578 (1911) ]
[222 U.S. 578, 580] Messrs. Felix H. Levy and Benjamin N. Cordozo for petitioner.
The Attorney General in opposition. [222 U.S. 578, 581]
Leave to file petition denied.
1. One who is not a party to a record and judgment is not entitled to appeal therefrom. Bayard v. Lombard, 9 How. 530, 13 L. ed. 245; Indiana Southern R. Co. v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. 109 U.S. 168 , 27 L. ed. 895, 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 108; Ex parte Cockcroft, 104 U.S. 578 , 26 L. ed. 856.
2. The action of the court below in refusing to permit the movers to become parties to the record is not susceptible of being reviewed by this court on appeal, or indirectly, under the circumstances here disclosed, by the writ of mandamus. Ex parte Cutting, 94 U.S. 15 , 24 L. ed. 49; and see Credits Commutation Co. v. United States, 177 U.S. 311 , 44 L. ed. 782, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 636.
3. The merely general nature and character of the interest which the movers allege they have in the papers here filed is not, in any event, of such a character as to authorize them in this proceeding to assail the action of the court below. This is more obvious in this case since the act of the court which is assailed has been accepted by those who are parties to the record. United States v. Union P. R. Co. 105 U.S. 263 , 26 L. ed. 1021; Elwell v. Fosdick, 134 U.S. 500 , 33 L. ed. 998, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 598.