KingsWood v. Michelman

Ninth Circuit

KingsWood v. Michelman

504 F.2d 1108

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 17, 1974

DocketNo. 72-2100

StatusPublished

This text of 504 F.2d 1108 (KingsWood v. Michelman) 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

KingsWood v. Michelman, 504 F.2d 1108 (9th Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION ON REMAND

PER CURIAM:

Our original opinion in the subject cause is reported at 470 F.2d 996 (case 2) (9th Cir. 1972). We based our brief reversing opinion upon the opinion of a District Court in a similar case, thought by us to be well reasoned. In re Cedor, 337 F.Supp. 1103 (N.D.Cal.), aff’d 470 F.2d 996 (case 1) (9th Cir. 1972).

The Supreme Court has now reversed our opinion. Michelman, Trustee, etc. v. Kingswood, 418 U.S. 902, 94 S.Ct. 3191, 41 L.Ed.2d 1150 (1974). The Supreme Court’s mandate has now been received by our court and recites that the cause “is hereby, remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Kokoszka v. Belford, 417 U.S. 642, 94 S.Ct. 2431, . . . .” 41 L.Ed.2d 374 (1974).

We think that the District Court should be allowed the first opportunity for the further consideration required by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with Kokoszka v. Belford, supra.

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

OPINION ON REMAND

PER CURIAM:

Our original opinion in the subject cause is reported at 470 F.2d 996 (case 2) (9th Cir. 1972). We based our brief reversing opinion upon the opinion of a District Court in a similar case, thought by us to be well reasoned. In re Cedor, 337 F.Supp. 1103 (N.D.Cal.), aff’d 470 F.2d 996 (case 1) (9th Cir. 1972).

The Supreme Court has now reversed our opinion. Michelman, Trustee, etc. v. Kingswood, 418 U.S. 902, 94 S.Ct. 3191, 41 L.Ed.2d 1150 (1974). The Supreme Court’s mandate has now been received by our court and recites that the cause “is hereby, remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Kokoszka v. Belford, 417 U.S. 642, 94 S.Ct. 2431, . . . .” 41 L.Ed.2d 374 (1974).

We think that the District Court should be allowed the first opportunity for the further consideration required by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with Kokoszka v. Belford, supra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

504 F.2d 1108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kingswood-v-michelman-ca9-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack