Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank

First Circuit

Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank

99 F.2d 583, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 2929

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedOctober 29, 1938

DocketNo. 3347

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 99 F.2d 583 (Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank, 99 F.2d 583, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 2929 (1st Cir. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The decree of the District Court of April 20, 1938, is affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion of April 16, 1938, and for the further reason that the term of court at which the decree was entered, when the petition to amend was filed, had long since passed, and the amendment sought went to the substance of the decree and not to its form. See Fairmont Creamery Co. v. Minnesota, 275 U.S. 70, 48 S.Ct. 97, 72 L.Ed. 168; Hart v. Wiltsee et al., 1 Cir., 25 F.2d 863, and cases there cited; Casey v. Sterling Cider Co., 1 Cir., 15 F. 2d 52, and Schell v. Dodge, 107 U.S. 629, 2 S.Ct. 830, 27 L.Ed. 601.

The decree of the District Court is affirmed, with costs to the appellees.

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

PER CURIAM.

The decree of the District Court of April 20, 1938, is affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion of April 16, 1938, and for the further reason that the term of court at which the decree was entered, when the petition to amend was filed, had long since passed, and the amendment sought went to the substance of the decree and not to its form. See Fairmont Creamery Co. v. Minnesota, 275 U.S. 70, 48 S.Ct. 97, 72 L.Ed. 168; Hart v. Wiltsee et al., 1 Cir., 25 F.2d 863, and cases there cited; Casey v. Sterling Cider Co., 1 Cir., 15 F. 2d 52, and Schell v. Dodge, 107 U.S. 629, 2 S.Ct. 830, 27 L.Ed. 601.

The decree of the District Court is affirmed, with costs to the appellees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 F.2d 583, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 2929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sprague-v-ticonic-nat-bank-ca1-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack