Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
FREE SEWING MACH. CO. et al. v. MAUND
222 F. 1022·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1915
Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and MAXBF, District Judge.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
FREE SEWING MACH. CO. et al. v. MAUND.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 5, 1915.)
No. 2702.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Florida; Wm. B. Sheppard, Judge.
W. A. Blount, F. B. Carter, and A. O. Blount, Jr., all of Pensacola, Fla., J. Bowers Campbell, of Marianna, Fla., Fred T. Myers, of 'Tallahassee, Fla., and C. L. Wilson, of Marianna, Fla., for appellants.
Wm. C. Hodges and W. J. Oven, both of Tallahassee, Fla., for appellee.
Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and MAXBF, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The decree of the trial court, dismissing the petition •of creditors, was rendered July 23, 1914, and the F. A. Ames Company filed its petition to intervene on August 4, 1914. It follows that, when the ■cause was disposed of, the F. A. Ames Company was not a party to the proceeding, and therefore had no standing in court. Besides, it. has no standing here, since it is not a party to the appeal, nor does it complain, by assigning error, of the ruling of the court. In dismissing the petition of the •creditors, the trial court was right, and the decree is affirmed. Affirmed.