Hall

Hall v. McKinnon

Good Law
113 C.C.A. 440·193 F. 572·3 Alaska Fed. 726·1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4796
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 4, 1911No. 1,931California4,404 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Morrow, J.

(after stating the facts as above).

The defendants in error interpose a motion to dismiss the writ of error on the ground that the record was not filed in this court by or before the return day, and the time for filing the record was not extended by the judge who signed the citation, or by a judge of this court, as required by rule 16 of this court ( 150 Fed. xxix , 79 C.C.A. xxix ). The motion is purely technical and without merit.

It appears that Judge Lyons of the District Court of Alaska, Fourth Division, tried the case at Fairbanks, and signed the citation, and, from time to time, made orders *730 extending the return to the writ of error, including an extension dated November 24, 1910, extending the return date to January 31, 1911. The record was filed in this court December 27, 1910; but it appears that Judge Over-field, holding court for Judge Lyons at Fairbanks, made an intermediate order on August 29, 1910, extending the time for the return of the writ to November 21, 1910. And the objection is made that, as Judge Overfield did not sign the citation and is not a judge of this court, he was not authorized to make this intermediate order of extension of August 29, 1910.…

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.