United States v. M. v. Atlantic Reefer and John Doe

Fifth Circuit

United States v. M. v. Atlantic Reefer and John Doe

251 F.2d 58, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4287

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 25, 1955

Docket15333

StatusPublished

This text of 251 F.2d 58 (United States v. M. v. Atlantic Reefer and John Doe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. M. v. Atlantic Reefer and John Doe, 251 F.2d 58, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4287 (5th Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

*59 PER CURIAM.

Appellant, complaining of the designation by the appellees of the entire record and the resulting costs of printing entailed thereby, $471.20 as the appellant figures it, urges upon us that these costs should be assessed against the appellees.

Appellees, joining issue with appellant, point out that appellees’ designation was accepted without objection or question on appellant’s part and without resort to the provisions of this court’s rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A., particularly subdivision 12, submitting to the district judge the determination of whether any part designated is unnecessary. So pointing, they insist that the motion should be denied.

While there is certainly an appearance of merit in appellees’ opposition, it is unnecessary for us to decide it, for the short and simple answer to appellant’s motion is found in the fourth paragraph of our Rule 31 — Costs, providing no costs shall be allowed in this court for or against the United States.

The motion is denied.

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

*59 PER CURIAM.

Appellant, complaining of the designation by the appellees of the entire record and the resulting costs of printing entailed thereby, $471.20 as the appellant figures it, urges upon us that these costs should be assessed against the appellees.

Appellees, joining issue with appellant, point out that appellees’ designation was accepted without objection or question on appellant’s part and without resort to the provisions of this court’s rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A., particularly subdivision 12, submitting to the district judge the determination of whether any part designated is unnecessary. So pointing, they insist that the motion should be denied.

While there is certainly an appearance of merit in appellees’ opposition, it is unnecessary for us to decide it, for the short and simple answer to appellant’s motion is found in the fourth paragraph of our Rule 31 — Costs, providing no costs shall be allowed in this court for or against the United States.

The motion is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 F.2d 58, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-m-v-atlantic-reefer-and-john-doe-ca5-1955.