Miller v. Hatfield

Supreme Court

Miller v. Hatfield

309 U.S. 1, 60 S. Ct. 374, 84 L. Ed. 535, 1940 U.S. LEXIS 1183

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 15, 1940

Docket237

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 309 U.S. 1 (Miller v. Hatfield) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Hatfield, 309 U.S. 1, 60 S. Ct. 374, 84 L. Ed. 535, 1940 U.S. LEXIS 1183 (1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This proceeding was instituted by a farmer-debtor pursuant to § 75 of the Bankruptcy Act. Under an order of the District Court, approving an order of the conciliation commissioner, petitioner’s farm was sold to one of the co-trustees of a mortgage upon the property and the sale was confirmed by the District Court.

A petition for rehearing, was denied. Upon appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals, that court found that the purchaser at the sale was not a party to the appeal and *2 dismissed it. Petitioner sought a rehearing upon the ground that the purchaser had actual notice of the appeal and had appeared in the Court of Appeals joining in an objection to an enlargement of time for filing the record, and also seeking appointment of a receiver or an additional supersedeas bond. Petitioner also asked that- if it be considered that the purchaser was not already before the court, a citation should be issued to bring him in. The Court of Appeals denied both applications. Certiorari was granted, 308 U. S. 534.

We are of the opinion that the action of the Court of Appeals was erroneous. If the court deemed the purchaser to be a necessary party and not before the court, the motion to issue a citation to him should have been granted. R. S. 954, 28 U. S. C. 777. Dodge v. Knowles, 114. U. S. 430, 438; Knickerbocker Life Insurance Co. v. Pendleton, 115 U. S. 339; In re Knox-Powell-Stockton Co., 97 F. 2d 61.

The decree is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Appeals for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

Reversed.

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

Per Curiam.

This proceeding was instituted by a farmer-debtor pursuant to § 75 of the Bankruptcy Act. Under an order of the District Court, approving an order of the conciliation commissioner, petitioner’s farm was sold to one of the co-trustees of a mortgage upon the property and the sale was confirmed by the District Court.

A petition for rehearing, was denied. Upon appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals, that court found that the purchaser at the sale was not a party to the appeal and *2 dismissed it. Petitioner sought a rehearing upon the ground that the purchaser had actual notice of the appeal and had appeared in the Court of Appeals joining in an objection to an enlargement of time for filing the record, and also seeking appointment of a receiver or an additional supersedeas bond. Petitioner also asked that- if it be considered that the purchaser was not already before the court, a citation should be issued to bring him in. The Court of Appeals denied both applications. Certiorari was granted, 308 U. S. 534.

We are of the opinion that the action of the Court of Appeals was erroneous. If the court deemed the purchaser to be a necessary party and not before the court, the motion to issue a citation to him should have been granted. R. S. 954, 28 U. S. C. 777. Dodge v. Knowles, 114. U. S. 430, 438; Knickerbocker Life Insurance Co. v. Pendleton, 115 U. S. 339; In re Knox-Powell-Stockton Co., 97 F. 2d 61.

The decree is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Appeals for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 U.S. 1, 60 S. Ct. 374, 84 L. Ed. 535, 1940 U.S. LEXIS 1183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-hatfield-scotus-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack