Cunningham v. Mitchell
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.
The instant proceeding was brought by the trustee in bankruptcy, appellee, to give finality and effect to litigation of unusual persistency. In re Rury (C. C. A.) 2 F.(2d) 331; Bowen v. Rury, 117 Wash. 30, 200 P. 789; Cunningham v. Mitchell, 126 Wash. 294, 218 P. 386; Mitchell v. Cunningham (C. C. A.) 8 F.(2d) 813. Upon the going down of the mandate in the last-named case, the decree of the lower court was modified to comply with the views expressed in our reported opinion. On January 14,1926, the judge of the superior court of Washington for Benton county indorsed his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mitchell v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1924
- Cunningham v. MitchellWashington Supreme Court · 1923
- Mitchell v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Bowen v. RuryWashington Supreme Court · 1921
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sexton v. BarryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1956
- United States v. WalleyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1958
- Hazel v. Van BeekCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997