Judge. J. A. Gillett, of El Paso, Tex., for appellant. Wm. H. Burges and Robert L. Holliday, both of El Paso, Tex., for appellees. Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and FOSTER, District Judge. PER CURIAM. After a full consideration of this case, we conclude that the decree appealed from is correct, and it is therefore affirmed. THE PRUDENCE. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. November 7, 1912.) No. 1092. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Libels by Rosa Lee Cherry, administratrix of Benjamin Luther Cherry, deceased, and by Lena E. Harper, administratrix of Lee Harper, deceased, against the steam tug Prudence. From decrees for libelants (191 Fed. 993), defendant appeals. Affirmed. Edward R. Baird, Jr., of Norfolk, Va., for appellant. Henry Bowden and E. R. F. Wells, both of Norfolk, Va., for appellees. Before GOFF and PRITCHARD, Circuit Judges, and CONNOR, District Judge. PER CURIAM. We reach the conclusion that the court below properly viewed the conflicting evidence on which its decree was based, and that its disposition of the case under all the circumstances attending it is without error. Affirmed. RODEN v. DETTERING. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. September 11, 1916.) No. 2708. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Western District of Washington. Farrell, Kane & Stratton and Stanley J. Padden, all of Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff in error. Griffin & Griffin, of Seattle, Wash., for defendant in error. Ordered. upon due consideration, writ of error dismissed, with costs in favor of defendant in error and against plaintiff in error. SAVANNAH & N. W. RY. v. UNION TRUST CO. et al. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. November 3, 1916.) No. 2841. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Georgia; W. W. Lambdin, Judge. Suit by the Union Trust Company against the Great Eastern Lumber Company, in which the Savannah & Northwestern Railway intervened. From the decree in favor of complainant, intervener appeals. Modified and affirmed. Robert M. Hitch and Remer L. Denmark, both of Savannah, Ga., for appellant. William L. Clay and Frederick T. Saussy, both of Savannah, Ga., for appellees. Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and CALL, District Judge. PER CURIAM. This is an appeal from a final decree against the Savannah & Northwestern Railway, intervener in a suit for foreclosure of mortgage on real and personal property, wherein the Union Trust Company was complainant and the Great Eastern Lumber Company was respondent. The decree appealed from is in favor of the Union Trust Company, foreclosing a certain contract of purchase by the Savannah & Northwestern Railway from the Great Eastern Lumber Company of part of the property covered by the mortgage sought to be foreclosed in the main suit. The record shows that the Union Trust Company was fully entitled to a decree of foreclosure against the Savannah & Northwestern Railway. The decree rendered in the case, however, is apparently more in the nature of a forfeiture than the foreclosure to which the Union Company was entitled, and is erroneous in that respect, and should be modified, so as to make the decree rendered read as follows: It is therefore ordered, considered, and adjudged that all the right, title, and interest of the Savannah & Northwestern Railway in the properties of the defendant under the contract of purchase referred to in said intervention, and particularly all of its right, title, and interest of, in, and to the properties, rights, and oppositions herein before described in this decree, and particularly on pages 102, 103, and 104 in paragraph (b), parcel (2), are terminated and foreclosed. It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that unless the Savannah & Northwestern Railway, within 10 days from the date of this decree, pay the amount herein adjudged due and payable by the Savannah & Northwestern Railway, to wit, the sum of $24,238.02, with interest thereon at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum from January 1, 1915, into the registry of the court, an order of sale issue to the special master herein appointed, directing him, after due advertisement, to sell the said property, rights, and oppositions herein described, free from all and any right, equity, interest, or claim whatsoever of the Savannah & Northwestern Railway in and to the same. The proceeds of said sale to be applied to the payment of the said amount of $24,238.02, with interest thereon at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum from January 1, 1915, and all costs justly taxable against the Savannah & Northwestern Railway, and any balance to be paid to the said railway. For any deficiency judgment may be entered in favor of the receivers in this cause against the Savannah & Northwestern Railway for the same, and execution issue therefor. This modification is ordered, and, so modified, the decree appealed from is affirmed, with costs of appeal to be paid by the appellees. SOO HOO SONG v. UNITED STATES. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. October 3, 1916.) No. 2806. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Southern District of California. Paul W. Schenck and Richard Kittrelle, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff in error. Albert Schoonover, U. S. Atty., of Los Angeles, Cal. PER CURIAM. This case having been reached for argument, counsel for the defendant in error moved the dismissal of the writ of error therein for the noncompliance by the plaintiff in error with the provisions of rules 23 and 24 of the rules of practice of this court (231 Fed. v, vi, 144 C. C. A. v, vi), which motion was duly submitted to the court for consideration and decision. And it appearing to the court that the record herein has not been printed as required by said rule 23, and it further appearing to the court that the counsel for the plaintiff in error has failed to file with the clerk of this court a printed brief at least 15 days before the case was called for argument, as required by said rule 24, and that, according to this rule, the plaintiff in error is in default, and that, as prescribed by section 5 thereof, the case may be dismissed on motion, on consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court that the said motion be and hereby is granted, and that the writ of error in this case be and hereby is dismissed, for the noncompliance by the plaintiff in error with the provisions of rules 23 and 24 of the rules of practice of this court. STANDARD STEEL CO. v. ALABAMA & G. S. R. CO. et al. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. October 31, 1916.) No. 2840. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Alabama; William I. Grubb, Judge. Augustus Benners, of Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff in error. J. T. Stokely and A. G. Smith, both of Birmingham, Ala., for defendant in error. Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and CALL, District Judge. PER CURIAM. The only assignment of error presented in this case is that "the court erred in instructing the jury in writing at the request of defendants to find a verdict for them." We have considered the evidence in the light of briefs of counsel, and conclude that the evidence fully justified the direction complained of. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed. THOMSON ELECTRIC WELDING CO. et al. v. BARNEY & BERRY, Inc. (Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit. June 14, 1916.) No. 1115. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts. Application for leave to apply to District Court for leave to amend answer. Before PUTNAM and BINGHAM, Circuit Judges, and ALDRICH, District Judge. PER CURIAM. We have carefully examined the Bouchayer French patent, No. 330,200, relied upon by the defendants, in their application for leave to apply to the District Court to amend their answer, as an anticipation of the patent in suit, No. 1,046,066, issued to Harmatta, and are of the opinion that it is not material upon the question, or at the least, that it does not present such clear and convincing proof as is calculated to bring about a different result from that reached in our opinion handed down in this case on the 5th day of October, 1915. It seems rather to present a device, the essential features, mode of operation, and the result of which are entirely different from those disclosed in the Harmatta patent. Application denied. TRUST CO. OF GEORGIA et al. v. BLAKELY OIL & FERTILIZER CO.* (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. October 25, 1916.) No. 2959. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Georgia; William T. Newman, Judge. Clifford L. Anderson and Daniel W. Rountree, both of Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs in error. B. R. Collins, of Blakely, Ga., for defendant in error. Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge. PER CURIAM. On examination of the record, in connection with the briefs of counsel, we find no reversible error in the rulings of the trial judge, either as to the admission of evidence or in his charge or refusals to charge the jury. The verdict seems to be responsive to and supported by the evidence. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed. *Rehearing denied December 18, 1916. END OF CASES IN VOL. 236 KEY NUMBER SYSTEM) THIS IS A KEY NUMBER INDEX It Supplements the Decennial Digest, the Key-Number Series and ACCOUNT. See Corporations, 180. ACKNOWLEDGMENT. II. TAKING AND CERTIFICATE. 38 (U.S.D.C.) Under the decisions of the ute (Pell's Revisal N. C. 1908, § 1005).-Board ADMINISTRATION. See Bankruptcy, 267; Executors and Ad- ADMIRALTY. See Collision; Maritime Liens; Removal of I. JURISDICTION. 10 (U.S.D.C.) Since Act June 23, 1910, a 20 (U.S.C.C.A.) Though a seaman of a Cal- III. PARTIES, PROCESS, CLAIMS, AND SECURITY. 41 (U.S.C.C.A.) Leave to add, at trial, 50 (U.S.D.C.) Charterer of vessel held not For cases in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No. Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER (1025) |