S. P. Beecher v. Homer Smithson, Trustee
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Visicorp v. Software Arts, Inc. (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1983)
- Proteus Foods & Industries, Inc. v. Nippon Reizo Kabushiki Kaisha (District Court, S.D. New York 1967)
- William J. Powers, Jr. v. Citizens Union National Bank and Trust Company (6th Cir. 1964)
- Fred Parks, Trustee for Gulf Transportation Company v. B. F. Leaman and Sons, Inc. (5th Cir. 1960)
- Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank (9th Cir. 1955)
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
This appeal is one of a long series urged by a farmer-debtor whose real property has been administered for a number of years under § 75, sub. s, of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 203, sub. s. Appellant has through all these proceedings acted as his own counsel. The courts, including this, have been more than conscientious in dealing with him, and because of the situation have probably extended him favors beyond his technical rights. Appellant is not a lawyer and has been inclined to insist that his rights are bounded only by his desires.
There has been a motion to dismiss this appeal because Beecher did not think it necessary to file an appeal bond as security for costs as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 73(c), 28 U.S.C.A. See Coursey v. International Harvester Co., 10 Cir., 109 F.2d 774, 777; In re Braker, 6 Cir., 127 F.2d 652; General Orders Bankruptcy No. 36, 11 U.S.C.A. following section 53. This defect was not cured by sending at a later date a personal check to the Clerk of this Court “under protest” for costs. The rules cannot be improvised by the litigant. Further, Beecher did not file timely a designation of the record. This motion to dismiss was continued until the appeal was heard. It is now granted.
However, in view of the situation, all matters urged upon this Court have been examined and no merit has been found in any. The findings, conclusions and order of the trial court were correct. The patience and scrupulous care of this Court in dealing with this litigant are exemplary. 1
. Beecher v. Federal Land Bank of Spokane, 9 Cir., 143 F.2d 580; Id., 9 Cir., 146 F.2d 934 (2 cases); Id., 9 Cir., 146 F.2d 940; Id., 9 Cir., 146 F.2d 1000; Id., 9 Cir., 153 F.2d 982, certiorari denied 328 U.S. 869, 66 S.Ct. 1376, 90 L.Ed. 1639 and 328 U.S. 871, 66 S.Ct. 1364, 90 L.Ed. 1641, rehearing denied 329 U.S. 822, 67 S.Ct. 34, 91 L.Ed. 699; Id., 9 Cir., 153 F.2d 987, certiorari denied 328 U.S. 871, 66 S.Ct. 1364, 90 L.Ed. 1641, rehearing denied 329 U.S. 819, 67 S.Ct. 28, 91 L.Ed. 697; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 156 F.2d 220; Id., 9 Cir., 160 F.2d 294; Id., 9 Cir., 160 F.2d 296; Beecher v. Federal Land Bank of Spokane, 9 Cir., 166 F.2d 85; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 498; Id., 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 502; Id., 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 504; Beecher v. United States, 9 Cir., 184 F.2d 506; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 187 F.2d 448; In the Matter of Beecher, 9 Cir., 187 F.2d 858 (2 cases); Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 187 F.2d 858; Id., 9 Cir., 187 F.2d 859; In re Beecher, 9 Cir., 189 F.2d 604; In re Beecher, 9 Cir., 189 F.2d 604-605; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 189 F.2d 605; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 189 F.2d 606; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 189 F.2d 607; Id., 9 Cir., 191 F.2d 812; Id., 9 Cir., 192 F.2d 10, certiorari denied, 343 U.S. 953, 72 S.Ct. 1048, 96 L.Ed. 1354; Id., 344 U.S. 886, 73 S.Ct. 187, 97 L.Ed. 686; Beecher v. Smithson, 9 Cir., 205 F.2d 113; Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank, 9 Cir., 209 F.2d 20; Id., 9 Cir., 211 F.2d 158, certiorari denied 347 U.S. 949, 74 S.Ct. 649, 98 L.Ed. -, rehearing denied 347 U.S. 964, 74 S. Ct. 712, 98 L.Ed.-.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.