Redditt v. Hale

188 F.2d 832, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 3111
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided May 15, 1951·No. 14295·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only order which is involved in this appeal is the order made by the District Court directing the entry of judgment pursuant to the mandate of this Court in the same controversy. See Redditt v. Hale, 8 Cir., 184 F.2d 443, 447.

Concededly, the order of the District Court directed the entry of the judgment required by the mandate. That court could not have done otherwise. See and compare, Thornton v. Carter, 8 Cir., 109 F.2d 316.

The question whether the proceedings in the Probate Court of Crittenden County, Arkansas, referred to in our former opinion, have been terminated, as the appellants claim, is not before us on this appeal.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

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

Redditt v. Hale, 188 F.2d 832, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 3111 (8th Cir. 1951).

188 F.2d 832 (Redditt v. Hale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Redditt v. Hale Redditt v. Fogleman
199 F.2d 386 (Eighth Circuit, 1952)