The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (in case citations, 1st Cir.) is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:
More, United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit., 11, On May 23, 1955, Petzoldt learned of the issuance of the Lawrence receipts to the Fleming Bank and immediately made demand on Lawrence for the alfalfa seed delivered by him to Platte Valley as shown by the receipts issued by Platte Valley to him.
F. E. Pence;, 3, Subsequent to this remand, Aetna filed its complaint in the companion case here under consideration, alleging substantially the same bases for interpleader as to an endowment contract bought at the same time by Mrs. Rettenmeyer upon the life of Donald George Fleming.
, and James W. Kelleher, Boston, Mass., on motion and memorandum of appellants. U.S. Attys. Respondents, having filed a notice of appeal from the aforesaid interim order, have filed an application to this court for an order staying the execution of the interim order.
261 F.2d 260, Nicolo SAN FILIPPO, Petitioner, Appellant, v.John F. MULCAHEY, District Director of Immigration andNaturalization, Respondent, Appellee., United States Court of Appeals First Circuit., Before MAGRUDER, Chief Judge, and WOODBURY and HARTIGAN, Circuit judges., PER CURIAM.
, 11, It seems apparent that the District Court did not consider it technically appropriate to issue an order of 'remand' because in its view no removal of the case to the federal court had been effectuated by the filing of any 'such petition' by a defendant or defendants in the State court action.
262 F.2d 957, Marcantonio ROCCAFORTE, Petitioner, Appellant, v.John F. MULCAHEY, District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, Appellee. Francis J. W. Ford, Judge. U. S. Atty., Boston, Mass., with whom Anthony Julian, U. S. Atty., and Andrew A. Caffrey, Asst., PER CURIAM.
, HARTIGAN, Circuit Judge. In the Eckhart case the district court suggested that 31(1) was not intended to invalidate lifetime employment contracts and cited as authority for this proposition Brown v. Babcock, 4th Dep't 1943, 265 A.D. 596, 40 N.Y.S.2d 428; 429, affirmed 266 N.Y. 428, 195 N.E.
262 F.2d 287, Hilario SIERRA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v.MERCHANTS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Intervenor, Appellee., the fact of the matter is that the district judge in the case at bar has made no such determination nor given such express direction for the entry of judgment.
261 F.2d 449, 58-2 USTC P 9956, COMMONWEALTH of Massachusetts, DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENTSECURITY, Appellant, v.UNITED STATES of America et al. 47, 650, may be taken only upon allowance by this court., 9, A judgment will be entered dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
261 F.2d 153, Leone Dorothy Souza TEIXEIRA et al. The district court, on motion under 28 U.S.C. 1404(a), entered an order on February 5, 1958 (Civ.Action No. 57-168-S) transferring the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. McHie v. McHie, 7 Cir.
These efforts proving fruitless, the District Council, through its business agent, ordered Quinn's union carpenters off the job and when they quit so also did all other union men on the job and a general strike ensued. Trades Council, 1951, 341 U.S. 675, 71 S. Ct. 943, 95 L. Ed. 1284.
260 F.2d 348, CAPITOL PACKING COMPANY, Defendant, Appellant, v.CHICAGO DRESSED BEEF CO., Inc., Plaintiff, Appellee., United States Court of Appeals First Circuit.
261 F.2d 120, R. E. PECKHAM, Assignee and Trustee, Objector, Appellant, v.Jose E. CASALDUC, Trustee, et al. We think it clear that the motion to dismiss must be granted for the reason, if for no other, that Peckham never became a party to the proceedings in the lower court. 938, 80 L. Ed. 1395.
And in Commonwealth v. Cabot, 1922, 241 Mass. 131, 135 N.E. The reason that this is enough for our purposes is that the policy in suit, unlike the policies in suit in the Massachusetts civil cases cited above, covers not theft alone, but in addition all other like perils, losses and misfortunes.
It is, therefore, necessary for us to remand this case to the Tax Court for a determination by it as to whether the Commissioner has borne the burden of negativing by a preponderance of evidence that these alleged gifts were the sources of the taxpayers' net worth increases. 1202, 41 L. Ed. 311.
261 F.2d 347, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v.INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEAT AND FROST INSULATORS ANDASBESTOS WORKERS, AFL-CIO, Local 31, et al. When four non-union employees were put on this job in May, 1954, the respondent Union placed two pickets at the hospital.
256 F.2d 485, David S. JACOBANIS, Petitioner, Appellant, v.UNITED STATES of America, Respondent, Appellee. This part of the letter was of no concern to the district court., 7, We shall therefore on our own motion enter an order dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
, WOODBURY, Circuit Judge. Stackpole answered Malden's complaint, and also both of Graham's cross-claims, with a denial of its causal negligence plus in each case some other defenses which do not concern us on these appeals. 98, 69 L. Ed. 460, certiorari dismissed 270 U.S. 641, 46 S. Ct.
260 F.2d 88, S. C. JOHNSON SON, Inc., Defendant, Appellant, v.Lucille PALMIERI et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees., Before MAGRUDER, Chief Judge, and WOODBURY and HARTIGAN, Circuit Judges. 74, the Rhode Island court cited with approval, and applied, the case of MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co., supra.
260 F.2d 495, Leslie A. DUPLISEA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v.MAINE CENTRAL RAILROAD, Defendant, Appellee., Oscar Walker, Bangor, Me., 1, Appeal is taken from an order dismissing a complaint for lack of jurisdiction. 99, 2 L. Ed. 2d 80; As stated in Starke v. New York, Chicago St. Louis R. Co., 7 Cir.
