196 F.

2d 491

DIACON-ZADEH
v.
DENIZYOLLARI et al.
THE YOZGAT et al.
No. 10636.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued April 24, 1952.
Decided May 12, 1952.

George E. Beechwood, Philadelphia, Pa. (John V. Lovitt, and Conlen,

LaBrum & Beechwood, all of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for
appellant.
Charles Lakatos, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Before MARIS, KALODNER and STALEY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court denying the appellant's
motion to stay proceedings on a libel in admiralty pending arbitration pursuant
to the terms of the charter party between it and the libellant. Asserting that the
order in question is interlocutory and not appealable, the libellant has moved to
dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. The motion must be granted.

In Schoenamsgruber v. Hamburg Line, 1935, 294 U.S. 454, 55 S.Ct. 475, 79

L.Ed. 989, the Supreme Court held interlocutory and, therefore, unappealable
an order in an admiralty suit staying proceedings pending arbitration. The court
in that case rejected the argument of the appellant that the action was the
equivalent of the granting of an injunction and, therefore, appealable as such
under Sec. 129 of the Judicial Code of 19111 under the doctrine of Shanferoke
Co. v. Westchester Co., 1935, 293 W.S. 449, 55 S.Ct. 313, 79 L.Ed. 583, and
Enelow v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co., 1935,293 U.S. 379, 55 S.Ct. 310, 79 L.Ed. 440.
The court pointed out that, except in limitation of liability cases, courts of
admiralty do not issue injunctions. We see no reason to hold that the rule of the

Schoenamsgruber case does not apply merely because in that case an order
staying proceedings pending arbitration was granted whereas here it has been
refused.
3

The appellant relies on The Helen L., 9 Cir., 1940, 109 F.2d 884; W. E. Hedger
Transp. Corp. v. Gallotta, 2 Cir., 1944, 145 F.2d 870; and Curtis Bay Towing
Co. v. Tug Devin Moran, 2 Cir., 1947, 159 F.2d 273, as authority to the
contrary. But all these suits were limitation of liability cases in which cases, as
the Supreme Court recognized in the Schoenamsgruber case, the admiralty
court has jurisdiction to issue injunctions. In The Helen L. the appeal was from
an order dissolving an injunction restraining the prosecution of a suit in the
state court. In the Hedger case the appeal was from an order denying a motion
to reinstate a stay of an action in the state court. In the Kevin Moran case the
appeal was from an order denying a motion to vacate an injunction against
suing in other courts. It will thus be seen that each case involved an actual
injunction against other litigation, not merely a stay in the principal suit. The
cases accordingly do not support the appellant's contention that the order
denying a stay of proceedings in this case is appealable.

The appeal will be dismissed.

Now incorporated in 28 U.S.C. 1292