Baltuff v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Baltuff v. United States

35 F.2d 507, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3004

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 21, 1929

DocketNo. 5832

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 35 F.2d 507 (Baltuff v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baltuff v. United States, 35 F.2d 507, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3004 (9th Cir. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

From the nature of appeal contained in the record it appears that the appellant “appeals from the denial of Judge Edward E. Cushman for a [508]*508new judge to hear and determine the issues of the above-entitled cause, and his denial to libelant of her right to an authenticated copy of her affidavit of prejudice and amended application for a new judge.” Apparently, from the record, two applications were made to the trial judge for proceedings under 28 USCA §§ 23, 25, based upon an affidavit attempting to allege bias and prejudice, and that the judge was to be a witness.

These orders are not appealable. McColgan v. Lineker (C. C. A.) 289 F. 253.

Appeal dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

From the nature of appeal contained in the record it appears that the appellant “appeals from the denial of Judge Edward E. Cushman for a [508]*508new judge to hear and determine the issues of the above-entitled cause, and his denial to libelant of her right to an authenticated copy of her affidavit of prejudice and amended application for a new judge.” Apparently, from the record, two applications were made to the trial judge for proceedings under 28 USCA §§ 23, 25, based upon an affidavit attempting to allege bias and prejudice, and that the judge was to be a witness.

These orders are not appealable. McColgan v. Lineker (C. C. A.) 289 F. 253.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 F.2d 507, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 3004, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baltuff-v-united-states-ca9-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack