From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Freitag v. Strand of Atlantic City, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Sep 15, 1952
198 F.2d 752 (3d Cir. 1952)

Opinion

No. 10729.

September 15, 1952.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey; Thomas M. Madden, Judge.

W.L. Taub, pro se.

Irvin Lichtenstein, Camden, N.J., for Freitag.

Walter Anderson, Camden, N.J., for Camden Trust Co.

Grover C. Richman, Jr., Newark, N.J., for United States.

Before BIGGS, Chief Judge, and Goodrich, Circuit Judge.


The brief with appendix of Taub, counter-claimant, appellant, was due on May 15, 1952. Thereafter the time for filing the brief was extended until July 15, 1952. A second extension was granted him to September 13, 1952. Today the court has made an order granting him a third extension until October 6, 1952.

The case is an important one. Taub has at times employed or attempted to employ different counsel but the last two applications for extensions have been made by him pro se. For this reason the court has granted some extensions of time to him with perhaps greater generosity than his excuses merit. We point out that the present extension has taxed patience to the breaking point. If Taub's brief is not filed on or before October 6, 1952, his appeal will be liable to dismissal for want of prosecution.


Summaries of

Freitag v. Strand of Atlantic City, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Sep 15, 1952
198 F.2d 752 (3d Cir. 1952)
Case details for

Freitag v. Strand of Atlantic City, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Abraham FREITAG (Plaintiff) v. The STRAND OF ATLANTIC CITY, Inc., a New…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Sep 15, 1952

Citations

198 F.2d 752 (3d Cir. 1952)

Citing Cases

Wahoo International, Inc. v. Phix Doctor, Inc.

These factors do not carry equal weight; the possibility of delay alone, for instance, cannot justify denial…

Larios v. Nike Retail Servs., Inc.

These factors are not equally weighted; the possibility of delay alone, for instance, cannot justify denial…