Teed

United States v. Teed

Good Law
185 F.2d 561·1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3332
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 17, 195012556_1California1,391 words

Opinion

Opinion

Clark, J.

Motion was filed by one Shirley Doores for an order directing disbursement of money held by the Clerk of the District Court. Appellee, Edward H. Teed, filed petition in intervention asserting, among other things, the payment of $5950.00 to said Shirley Doores and that said amount was obtained by said Shirley Doores by means of threats, duress, fraud, extortion and blackmail, and in his petition appellee asks for payment to him of the said sum of $5950.00.

After a hearing the District Court made its findings of fact, conclusions of law and entered its judgment in favor of the said Intervenor, — Appellee here. This appeal is taken from the judgment entered by the District Court.

It may be well at this point to set out the facts, briefly, leading up to the motion and the petition in intervention upon which the judgment of the lower Court is based. These facts are disclosed by the record before us and the statement of facts by appellant which is agreed to by appellee.

Prior to and during the early part of 1944 Edward H. Teed, Appellee, was a practicing physician in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. During the early part of 1944 Shirley Doores, on several occasions, secured from Dr. Teed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.