Cochran v. Becker

Eighth Circuit

Cochran v. Becker

20 F.2d 1020, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2672

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJune 13, 1927

DocketNo. 5231

StatusPublished

This text of 20 F.2d 1020 (Cochran v. Becker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cochran v. Becker, 20 F.2d 1020, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2672 (8th Cir. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition by one of the plaintiffs in error “to vacate and file mandate to review, or certify,” etc.

This litigation has had a long course in this court, beginning in 1918, and various orders have been made therein. A partial outline is revealed in Cochran v. Becker (C. C. A.) 276 F. 280. The matter finally went, by writ of error to this court, to the Supreme Court which dismissed such writ for want of jurisdiction. 261 U. S. 607, 43 S. Ct. 363, 67 L. Ed. 824. Thereafter mandate from the Supreme Court issued to this court, being received by the clerk of this court on July 11, 1923. July 27, 1925, plaintiffs in error filed a motion to file that mandate. September 23, 1925, that motion was denied. December 3, 1925, the above petition was filed to vacate the last above order and to file the mandate. Some months later this motion was submitted. No change in situation is shown, nor any satisfactory reasons shown to us why the action of the court in denying the above motion should be set aside.

The “petition” should be and is denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition by one of the plaintiffs in error “to vacate and file mandate to review, or certify,” etc.

This litigation has had a long course in this court, beginning in 1918, and various orders have been made therein. A partial outline is revealed in Cochran v. Becker (C. C. A.) 276 F. 280. The matter finally went, by writ of error to this court, to the Supreme Court which dismissed such writ for want of jurisdiction. 261 U. S. 607, 43 S. Ct. 363, 67 L. Ed. 824. Thereafter mandate from the Supreme Court issued to this court, being received by the clerk of this court on July 11, 1923. July 27, 1925, plaintiffs in error filed a motion to file that mandate. September 23, 1925, that motion was denied. December 3, 1925, the above petition was filed to vacate the last above order and to file the mandate. Some months later this motion was submitted. No change in situation is shown, nor any satisfactory reasons shown to us why the action of the court in denying the above motion should be set aside.

The “petition” should be and is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 F.2d 1020, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-becker-ca8-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack