Lee Ling Hing v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Lee Ling Hing v. United States

236 F. 1019, 149 C.C.A. 668, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2369

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 3, 1916

DocketNo. 2863

StatusPublished

This text of 236 F. 1019 (Lee Ling Hing 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

Lee Ling Hing v. United States, 236 F. 1019, 149 C.C.A. 668, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2369 (9th Cir. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on regularly to be hoard on the motion of counsel for the defendant in error to dismiss the writ of error therein for the noncompliance by the plaintiff in error with the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the rules of practice of this court (208 Fed. ix, 124 C. C. A. ix), and was duly submitted, and it appearing to the court that the plaintiff in error has failed to file a record thereof and to docket the case by or before the return day, and has failed to comply with the said rule, and that, pursuant to the said rule, the defendant in error has docketed the case and produced and filed a certificate of the clerk of (ho said district court, stating the case and certifying that a writ of error therein had been duly sued out, on consideration whereof, and pursuant to the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the rules of practice of this court, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the said motion be and hereby is granted, and that the writ of error in this cause be and hereby is dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on regularly to be hoard on the motion of counsel for the defendant in error to dismiss the writ of error therein for the noncompliance by the plaintiff in error with the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the rules of practice of this court (208 Fed. ix, 124 C. C. A. ix), and was duly submitted, and it appearing to the court that the plaintiff in error has failed to file a record thereof and to docket the case by or before the return day, and has failed to comply with the said rule, and that, pursuant to the said rule, the defendant in error has docketed the case and produced and filed a certificate of the clerk of (ho said district court, stating the case and certifying that a writ of error therein had been duly sued out, on consideration whereof, and pursuant to the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the rules of practice of this court, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the said motion be and hereby is granted, and that the writ of error in this cause be and hereby is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 F. 1019, 149 C.C.A. 668, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-ling-hing-v-united-states-ca9-1916.