Legal Opinion

In re Putnam

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 9, 1953No. Nos. 19681, 19164, 19671, 20472Published

1Opinion of the Court

GOURLEY, Chief Judge.

In these farmer debtor proceedings the question arises as to whether there is any matter within the jurisdiction of the court which entitled the petitioners to relief.

The matter comes before the court on motion of the Clerk to dismiss each of said petitions as an inactive case, as provided by Rule 5(n) of the Rules of the Court:

“Dismissal of Inactive Cases. In any case in which no proceeding toward bringing it to issue, trial or termination has been taken for a period of three consecutive years, the Clerk shall present the matter to the Court for appropriate…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bernards v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Federal Land Bank of Baltimore v. PutnamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  3. Putnam v. Federal Land Bank of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. In re PutnamDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. In re PutnamDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API