In re Silverman

Second Circuit

In re Silverman

11 F.2d 970, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2649

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 19, 1926

DocketNo. 201

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 11 F.2d 970 (In re Silverman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Silverman, 11 F.2d 970, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2649 (2d Cir. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is taken from an order punishing one Zaek for not obeying another order made many months earlier. Zack appeared and in substance pleaded only that the court never had authority to enter the order that he had not obeyed. But the point had been ruled against him months before, he had taken an appeal, the appeal had been dismissed, and the point had become an adjudicated thing. This appellant can no longer raise the point of lack of jurisdiction to make the original order, and we are precluded from considering it.

The order is modified, by' striking out the provision for interest and substituting a direction that Zaek pay over the principál sum and whatever he has earned with it or by it. As modified, the order is affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is taken from an order punishing one Zaek for not obeying another order made many months earlier. Zack appeared and in substance pleaded only that the court never had authority to enter the order that he had not obeyed. But the point had been ruled against him months before, he had taken an appeal, the appeal had been dismissed, and the point had become an adjudicated thing. This appellant can no longer raise the point of lack of jurisdiction to make the original order, and we are precluded from considering it.

The order is modified, by' striking out the provision for interest and substituting a direction that Zaek pay over the principál sum and whatever he has earned with it or by it. As modified, the order is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F.2d 970, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-silverman-ca2-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack