Lucy v. Board of Trustees of University of Alabama

Fifth Circuit

Lucy v. Board of Trustees of University of Alabama

213 F.2d 846, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3581

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 15, 1954

Docket14857

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 213 F.2d 846 (Lucy v. Board of Trustees of University of Alabama) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lucy v. Board of Trustees of University of Alabama, 213 F.2d 846, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3581 (5th Cir. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

In the order appealed from, dismissing the complaint as to each of the defendants in this cause, the court below allowed the plaintiffs fifteen days within which to amend their complaint. It also allowed one of the defendants until October 27, 1953, to file objections to the application to substitute him as a party defendant for defendant Bidgood. The order appealed from was dated October 9 1953, and the notice of appeal was filed October 27, 1953. There is nothing in the record to show that the plaintiffs did not amend their complaint within the fifteen days allowed them for that purpose, and there is nothing in the record to show that Oliver Cromwell Carmichael did not file objections to the application to substitute him as a party defendant for defendant Bidgood. Accordingly, the appeal was prematurely filed and should be dismissed for that reason. Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer Corporation, 2 Cir., 37 F.2d 14. It is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.

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

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

In the order appealed from, dismissing the complaint as to each of the defendants in this cause, the court below allowed the plaintiffs fifteen days within which to amend their complaint. It also allowed one of the defendants until October 27, 1953, to file objections to the application to substitute him as a party defendant for defendant Bidgood. The order appealed from was dated October 9 1953, and the notice of appeal was filed October 27, 1953. There is nothing in the record to show that the plaintiffs did not amend their complaint within the fifteen days allowed them for that purpose, and there is nothing in the record to show that Oliver Cromwell Carmichael did not file objections to the application to substitute him as a party defendant for defendant Bidgood. Accordingly, the appeal was prematurely filed and should be dismissed for that reason. Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer Corporation, 2 Cir., 37 F.2d 14. It is so ordered.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 F.2d 846, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3581, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucy-v-board-of-trustees-of-university-of-alabama-ca5-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack