Legal Opinion · Dissent

Miller v. Clausen

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided May 17, 1924No. 6448Published

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska; Joseph W. Woodrough, Judge. Action by Catharina Clausen against Thomas W. Miller, as Alien Property Custodian, and another. Decree for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Plaintiff dying pending appeal, George Arthur Clausen and another, her heirs at law, were substituted as appellees.

1Dissent

STONE, Circuit Judge.

I am compelled to dissent because I think (1) the decree in the state county court as to title is not binding upon this court; (2) the findings set forth in and made the basis of that decree are not evidence herein; and (3) if such findings be denied evidentiary value herein, there is no evidence to support the decree herein.

•The evidence herein consisted (a) of the above decree of the county court of Morrill county, Neb., rendered on September 21, 1922, in the matter of the estate of the deceased brother; (b) of the testimony of one witness, George E. Turkington; and (c)…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Logue v. FerrisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API