Legal Opinion

Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. Bank

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided October 29, 1938No. 3347PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The decree of the District Court of April 20, 1938, is affirmed for the reasons stated in its opinion of April 16, 1938, and for the further reason that the term of court at which the decree was entered, when the petition to amend was filed, had long since passed, and the amendment sought went to the substance of the decree and not to its form. See Fairmont Creamery Co. v. Minnesota, 275 U.S. 70, 48 S.Ct. 97, 72 L.Ed. 168; Hart v. Wiltsee et al., 1 Cir., 25 F.2d 863, and cases there cited; Casey v. Sterling Cider Co., 1 Cir., 15 F. 2d 52, and Schell v. Dodge, 107 U.S. 629, 2 S.Ct. 830, 27…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fairmont Creamery Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Schell v. DodgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  3. Hart v. WiltseeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1928
  4. Casey v. Sterling Cider Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1926

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sprague v. Ticonic Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1940
  2. Lack v. Western Loan & Building Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API