Wetzel v. Schaefer

Fifth Circuit

Wetzel v. Schaefer

164 F.2d 483

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 21, 1947

DocketNo. 11856

StatusPublished

This text of 164 F.2d 483 (Wetzel v. Schaefer) 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

Wetzel v. Schaefer, 164 F.2d 483 (5th Cir. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was a prisoner, serving a sentence at Kilby Prison, Montgomery, Alabama. At his request, he was brought into court and permitted to argue his own case.

This same case has been heard and considered in many courts since the year 1928, and has been once before the Supreme Courts of Alabama (239 Ala. 699, 195 So. 905) and the United States (316 U.S. 678, 62 S.Ct. 1108, 86 L.Ed. 1751). The case was heard and considered by this court and an opinion rendered therein on December 26, 1941, covering each and every contention here raised by appellant. Wetzel v. Schaefer, 124 F.2d 308. It is here again on petition for review.

The court below, on September 16, 1946, and on petition of appellant, went into every phase of the case. The record discloses that the case was then fully and fairly heard, and with a patience and forbearance which bespeaks the eagerness of the trial judge to ascertain the true facts. After such hearing, the trial judge concluded his decree as follows: “That the plea to the jurisdiction of the court filed by the bankrupt on March 29th, 1943, is not well taken and that the order of the referee dismissing the same should be and the same is hereby confirmed. That the petition for review of the said order be and the same is hereby dismissed at the cost of the petitioner, Ed Wetzel.”

We find no reversible error in the record and the judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was a prisoner, serving a sentence at Kilby Prison, Montgomery, Alabama. At his request, he was brought into court and permitted to argue his own case.

This same case has been heard and considered in many courts since the year 1928, and has been once before the Supreme Courts of Alabama (239 Ala. 699, 195 So. 905) and the United States (316 U.S. 678, 62 S.Ct. 1108, 86 L.Ed. 1751). The case was heard and considered by this court and an opinion rendered therein on December 26, 1941, covering each and every contention here raised by appellant. Wetzel v. Schaefer, 124 F.2d 308. It is here again on petition for review.

The court below, on September 16, 1946, and on petition of appellant, went into every phase of the case. The record discloses that the case was then fully and fairly heard, and with a patience and forbearance which bespeaks the eagerness of the trial judge to ascertain the true facts. After such hearing, the trial judge concluded his decree as follows: “That the plea to the jurisdiction of the court filed by the bankrupt on March 29th, 1943, is not well taken and that the order of the referee dismissing the same should be and the same is hereby confirmed. That the petition for review of the said order be and the same is hereby dismissed at the cost of the petitioner, Ed Wetzel.”

We find no reversible error in the record and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 F.2d 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wetzel-v-schaefer-ca5-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack