Curtis H. Springer v. Lolly Best

There is on file here a paper designated as “Motion of Cross-Appeal in Forma Pauperis.” It is signed by Max Herzig and Paul Hill, attorneys for appellees. The substance is that certain plaintiffs below are indigent and that a judgment in their favor has been appealed by Springer, the defendant, and that the District Court allowed them to proceed in forma pauperis. Therefore, based upon a recital of evidence allegedly in the reporter’s transcript, which neither side has brought before us, they pray to be allowed to cross-appeal in forma pauperis.

The judgment was entered September 9, 1957, and the time for cross-appeal has long since expired. The motion is dismissed and, since extraneous matter is therein contained, is stricken from the file.

There is a second motion by appellees, asking that this Court correct and revise the record judgment and orders to conform to the pleadings and proof and allow the pleadings to be amended to conform to the proof, to order the reporter’s transcript of the trial to be filed, to order a finding that the “court below” give instructions to the jury to that effect and for abatement. Although this remarkable document is signed by purported lawyers,…