E. L. Cord, Individually and Doing Business as Los Angeles Broadcasting Company, and v. Calvin J. Smith, And

We have before us four motions, all relating to our decision of November 4, 1964, in the case of Cord v. Smith, 338 F.2d 516 . They are (1) a motion by Cord for clarification of our mandate, (2) a motion by Cord that this court direct the dismissal of an action entitled Young v. Cord, (3) a motion by Smith and Attorney Young that we vacate our mandate and expunge our opinion, and (4) a motion by the same parties to dismiss the first two motions.

We first state the background of these motions. Our mandate was spread, upon the records of the District Court on April 26, 1965. In compliance with the mandate, the case was transferred to Judge Whelan. On May 5, 1965 there came on for hearing a motion previously noticed by Cord for a protective order in connection with a deposition. On that morning Attorney Young filed in the case of Smith v. Cord a document entitled “Complaint on Assignment and Demand for Jury Trial.” It names Young as “Co-plaintiff, Assignee.” It refers to and incorporates Smith’s complaint, and alleges that, on February 21,1964, before *420 the action was filed, Smith assigned to Young one-half of his cause of action. The prayer is for one-half of the recovery. Young…

(concurring).

I concur in the foregoing opinion. I hope that the decision will permit Messrs. Smith and Cord to get on with their suit in the district court, but I am not sure it will.

If I were acting alone, I believe that I would resort to the extraordinary device of appointing an equity receiver to represent Mr. Young in court. This might restore dignity. As it is now, Mr. Young makes scattergun charges and opposing counsel over-reacts.

370 F.2d 418 E. L. CORD, individually and doing business as Los Angeles Broadcasting Company, Appellant and Petitioner, v. Calvin J. SMITH, Appellee and Respondent. No. 19416. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. December 15, 1966. Milo V. Olson, William K. Woodburn, Los Angeles, Cal., Edward D. Neuhoff, San Marino, Cal., for appellant. Lyndol L. Young, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee. Before CHAMBERS, BARNES and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges. DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: 1 We have before us four motions, all relating to our decision of November 4, 1964, in the case of Cord v. Smith, 338 F.2d 516 . They are (1) a motion by Cord for clarification of our mandate, (2) a motion by Cord that this court direct the dismissal of an action entitled Young v. Cord, (3) a motion by Smith and Attorney Young that we vacate our mandate and expunge our opinion, and (4) a motion by the same parties to dismiss the first two motions. 2 We first state the background of these motions. Our mandate was spread upon the records of the District Court on April 26, 1965. In compliance with the mandate, the case was transferred to Judge Whelan. On May 5, 1965 there came on for hearing a motion previously…