Pacific Coast Marine Firemen, Oilers, Watertenders & Wipers Ass'n v. Coastwise

171 F.2d 284, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2823
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 6, 1948·No. No. 12034·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, here on appeal from an interlocutory order, procured a valid order from the district court extending his time to docket the record with our clerk to September 10, 1948. On the next day appellant docketed the record. Appellee moves to dismiss the appeal because of the one day added to the 70 day period of our rules to reach joinder of issue on the briefs.

If the interlocutory order be reversed, there may be a saving of the district court’s and the litigants’ efforts and time. Had the appellant moved us on September 11, 1948, to docket but one day after his allowed time had expired, we undoubtedly would have granted the motion. The delay of the one day is a matter de minimis.

The motion is denied.

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

Pacific Coast Marine Firemen, Oilers, Watertenders & Wipers Ass'n v. Coastwise, 171 F.2d 284, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2823 (9th Cir. 1948).

171 F.2d 284 (Pacific Coast Marine Firemen, Oilers, Watertenders & Wipers Ass'n v. Coastwise) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Maghan v. Young
154 F.2d 13 (D.C. Circuit, 1946)
United States ex rel. Rempas v. Schlotfeldt
123 F.2d 109 (Seventh Circuit, 1941)
Morrow v. Wood
126 F.2d 1021 (Fifth Circuit, 1942)
Gammill v. Federal Land Bank
129 F.2d 501 (Seventh Circuit, 1942)