St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. McLelland

Eighth Circuit

St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. McLelland

62 F. 118, 10 C.C.A. 302, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2280

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMay 21, 1894

DocketNo. 292

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 F. 118 (St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. McLelland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. McLelland, 62 F. 118, 10 C.C.A. 302, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2280 (8th Cir. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

THAYER, District Judge.

This is a second writ of error which was sued out in this case, after a first writ of error had been granted to obtain a reversal of the judgment for errors committed at the trial. The present writ was sued out to correct alleged errors of the trial court in the taxation of costs after the rendition of judgment. As we have already reversed the judgment in this case, on which the liability to pay the disputed costs depends (62 Fed. 116), and as there was no apparent necessity for suing out the second writ, inasmuch as all of the assigned errors might have been incorporated in one and the same record, the second writ of error should be dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff in error, and it is so ordered.

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

THAYER, District Judge.

This is a second writ of error which was sued out in this case, after a first writ of error had been granted to obtain a reversal of the judgment for errors committed at the trial. The present writ was sued out to correct alleged errors of the trial court in the taxation of costs after the rendition of judgment. As we have already reversed the judgment in this case, on which the liability to pay the disputed costs depends (62 Fed. 116), and as there was no apparent necessity for suing out the second writ, inasmuch as all of the assigned errors might have been incorporated in one and the same record, the second writ of error should be dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff in error, and it is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 F. 118, 10 C.C.A. 302, 1894 U.S. App. LEXIS 2280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-louis-s-f-ry-co-v-mclelland-ca8-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack