Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

241 U. S.

Amendment, Rule 10.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

OCTOBER TERM, 1915.

IT IS ORDERED BY THE COURT that Sections 21 and 92 of Rule 10 of this Court be, and the same are hereby, amended so as to read as follows:

2. Immediately after the designation of the parts of the record to be printed or the expiration of the time allotted therefor, the Clerk shall make an estimate of the cost of printing the record, his fee for preparing it for the printer and supervising fee, and other probable fees, and upon application therefor shall furnish the same to the party docketing the case. If such estimated sum be not paid within ninety days after the cause is docketed, it shall be the duty of the Clerk to report that fact to the Court, and thereupon the cause will be dismissed, unless good cause to the contrary is shown.

9. When the record is filed, or within twenty days thereafter, the plaintiff in error or appellant may file with the Clerk a statement of the points on which he intends to rely and of the parts of the record which he thinks necessary for the consideration thereof, with proof of service of the same on the adverse party. The adverse party, within thirty days thereafter, may designate in writing, filed with the Clerk, additional parts of the record which he thinks material; and, if he shall not do so, he shall be held to have consented to a hearing on the parts designated by the plaintiff in error or appellant. If parts of the record shall be so designated by one or both of the parties, the Clerk shall print those parts only; and the Court will consider nothing but those parts of the record and the points so stated. If at the hearing it shall appear that any material 2 See 210 U. S. 481.

1 See 210 U. S. 479.

Amendment, Rule 10.

241 U.S. part of the record has not been printed, the writ of error or appeal may be dismissed or such other order made as the circumstances may appear to the Court to require. If the defendant in error or appellee shall have caused unnec essary parts of the record to be printed, such order as to costs may be made as the Court shall think proper.

The fees of the Clerk under Rule 24, Section 7,1 shall be computed, as at present, on the folios in the record as filed, and shall be in full for the performance of his duties in the execution hereof.

These amendments shall go into effect May 1, 1916. (Promulgated March 20, 1916.)

1 See 210 U. S. 492.

241 U. S.

Order.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

OCTOBER TERM, 1915.

ORDER: It is ordered by the Court that Rule 37 of this Court1 be amended by adding the following section:

4. In any case where the time for presenting a petition for certiorari is expressly limited by statute and where the court has adjourned for the term, the petition may be presented during such adjournment and within the period prescribed, by filing it, together with the printed record and briefs, in the office of the clerk, and such filing shall have the same effect as a presentation in open court. Promulgated June 12, 1916.

1 See 210 U. S. 501.

241 U. S.

Opinions Per Curiam, Etc.

OPINIONS PER CURIAM, FROM JANUARY 17, 1916, TO JUNE 12, 1916.

No. 156. LEONARD R. COATES, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. In error to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. Argued January 7 and 10, 1916. Decided January 17, 1916. Per Curiam. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of American Security & Trust Co. v. District of Columbia, 224 U. S. 491; District of Columbia v. Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington R. R., 232 U. S. 716; Washington & Mt. Vernon Ry. v. Downey, 236 U. S. 190. Mr. F. P. B. Sands for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Conrad H. Syme and Mr. Robert L. Williams (by special leave) for the defendant in error.

No. 157. WILLIAM B. THOMPSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, V. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS. In error to the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri. Argued January 11, 1916. Decided January 17, 1916. Per Curiam. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of Louisiana Navigation Co. v. Oyster Commission, 226 U. S. 99; United States v. Beatty, 232 U. S. 463; Pons v. Yazoo & Mississippi Valley R. R., 232 U. S. 720. Mr. Ford W. Thompson for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Truman P. Young and Mr. Charles H. Daues for the defendant in error.

No. 158. HILMA NELSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. RICHARD G. WOOD. In error to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Argued January 11 and 12 for the plaintiff in error, and submitted by defendant in error. Decided January 17, 1916. Per

« PředchozíPokračovat »