Thomas Day Co. v. Doble Laboratories

Good Law
41 F.2d 51·1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2721
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 2, 1930No. 6050California1,026 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Dietrich, J.

Appeal herein was sued out October 25,. 1929, from a final decree “entered” May 27 or 28, 1929, and appellee moves dismissal thereof upon the ground that it was not taken within the statutory period (28 USCA § 230). Proper disposition of the motion turns on the effect to bo given to a petition for rehearing filed by appellant and the proceedings had in relation, thereto. By appellee the general rule is conceded to be that a petition for rehearing, if seasonably filed and entertained by the court, suspends the running of the time for appeal until a ruling thereon is made. But it contends that the-petition hero relied upon met neither of these qualifying conditions.

It seems that at the time the decree was entered there was a standing rule of the trial court (Rule 44) providing that “petitions for rehearing shall in all cases be made to the court either before the entry of * * * decree or within ten days after receiving notice thereof.” The rule further provided *52 that the petition must be filed with the clerk and served upon the adverse party; and the adverse party is given ten days after service in which to serve and-file a reply.

On May 27, 1928, counsel for both parties…

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.