Legal Opinion

Tucker Products Corp. v. Helms

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 14, 1948No. 12125PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendants and appellees move to dismiss the appeal herein on the ground that the time to file the transcript of record in the district court for docketing the appeal expired on November 10, 1948, ninety days after the filing of the notice of appeal, and the transcript and required filing fee were not tendered the clerk of this court until December 1, 1948.

We agree that the appeal should be dismissed. The contention of plaintiff and appellant is that its attorneys, officers of this court, may engage in other litigation and that this “preoccupation in other matters” relieves them of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Maghan v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1946

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Jacqueline Selph v. Council of the City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
  2. Anthony Greco, Debtor-Appellant v. James Stubenberg H. Gobel Peacock Partners Kishi Trustees Andrew Hartnett and Troy Corp., Creditors-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  3. Maryland Casualty Co. v. ConnerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967
  4. Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. v. Healy Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1977
  5. United States v. Robert E. BowenCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API