U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, 1951

Redditt v. Hale

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Decided May 15, 1951 · Sanborn, Woodrough, Riddick

188 F.2d 832; 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 3111 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

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.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Redditt v. Hale Redditt v. Fogleman (8th Cir. 1952)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.