From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Redditt v. Hale

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
May 15, 1951
188 F.2d 832 (8th Cir. 1951)

Opinion

No. 14295.

May 15, 1951.

Thomas F. Turley, Jr., Memphis, Tenn. (Hal B. Mixon, Marianna, Ark., on the brief), for appellants.

Joe C. Barrett, Jonesboro, Ark. (Charles Frierson, Jonesboro, Ark., on the brief), for appellees.

Before SANBORN, WOODROUGH, and RIDDICK, Circuit Judges.


The only order which is involved in this appeal is the order made by the District Court directing the entry of judgment pursuant to the mandate of this Court in the same controversy. See Redditt v. Hale, 8 Cir., 184 F.2d 443, 447.

Concededly, the order of the District Court directed the entry of the judgment required by the mandate. That court could not have done otherwise. See and compare, Thornton v. Carter, 8 Cir., 109 F.2d 316.

The question whether the proceedings in the Probate Court of Crittenden County, Arkansas, referred to in our former opinion, have been terminated, as the appellants claim, is not before us on this appeal.

The order appealed from is affirmed.


Summaries of

Redditt v. Hale

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
May 15, 1951
188 F.2d 832 (8th Cir. 1951)
Case details for

Redditt v. Hale

Case Details

Full title:REDDITT et al. v. HALE et al

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: May 15, 1951

Citations

188 F.2d 832 (8th Cir. 1951)

Citing Cases

Redditt v. Hale

Instead, they have prosecuted two wholly frivolous actions in the District Court with appeals to this court…

Paull v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Company

We have quoted extensively from our opinion in Thornton because the legal principles therein expressed,…