Cutting Room Appliances Corporation v. Paul Jones, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division

218 F.2d 954
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedDecember 17, 1954
Docket12295_1
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 218 F.2d 954 (Cutting Room Appliances Corporation v. Paul Jones, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cutting Room Appliances Corporation v. Paul Jones, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, 218 F.2d 954 (6th Cir. 1954).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard upon the record and briefs and written communications of counsel;

And it appearing that the Honorable Paul Jones, Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, in an order filed in this court November 26, 1954, has indicated his intention to reconsider his action of transferring the case of Cutting Room Appliances Corporation v. Weatherbee Coats, Inc., Civil No. 27,-873, from the District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, to the District Court for the Southern District of New York, and has indicated his intention to place the said case upon the next non-jury civil assignment of the District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division ;

And it appearing that counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner has filed a written consent to such action;

And it appearing that such action will reflect a wise and practical appraisal of the crowded condition of the docket in the Southern District of New York and an exercise of proper judicial discretion on the part of the District Court for the Northern. District of Ohio, it is ordered that such proposed order be and it is hereby approved; and

It is ordered that the petition for writ of mandamus pending herein be and it hereby is dismissed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
218 F.2d 954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cutting-room-appliances-corporation-v-paul-jones-chief-judge-united-ca6-1954.