Union Guardian Trust Co. v. Jastromb, 5785

• Decision Date: 06 March 1931
• Docket Number: 5786,5807.,No. 5785,5785
• Citation: 47 F.2d 689
• Parties: UNION GUARDIAN TRUST CO. v. JASTROMB et al. TESTORI et al. v. SAME.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

47 F.2d 689 (1931)

UNION GUARDIAN TRUST CO. v. JASTROMB et al.

TESTORI et al. v. SAME.

Nos. 5785, 5786, 5807.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 6, 1931.

Bulkley, Ledyard, Mills & Dickinson, of Detroit, Mich., for appellant.

Paul R. Dailey, of Detroit, Mich., for appellees.

Before DENISON, MOORMAN, and HICKS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In each of these cases there is a motion to dismiss the appeal. The cases arise in this way:

The receiver in bankruptcy of the Prudential Discount Company came into the possession of two automobiles, a Cadillac which was claimed by Jastromb, and a Marmon which was claimed by Testori. The Union Trust Company claimed both machines, as assignee of the notes and title contracts of Jastromb and Testori. All three filed petitions for reclamation. These came on to be heard before the District Judge. On March 7, 1930, he filed an opinion which decided the merits in favor of Jastromb and Testori, and concluded: "In view of these conclusions the reclamation petition of the Union Trust Co. will be denied. The reclamation petitions of * * * Jastromb and Testori will be granted, and orders may be entered in accordance with this memorandum." On the same day the clerk entered on the journal the order "that the said petition of the Union Trust Co. be and the same is hereby denied, and the said petitions of * * * Jastromb and Testori be and the same are hereby granted, for the reasons set forth in the written opinion this day filed herein." Counsel for the Union Trust Company, not knowing that the order had been entered by the clerk, drafted a more detailed order containing certain recitals, and submitted it to the judge for signature. After some controversy and revision, the judge, on March 18, signed an order which, after some recitals, was in substantially the same language as the order of March 7. On April 15, the Union Trust Company perfected an appeal from the order of March 18, relating to the Jastromb automobile, which appeal has become No. 5785 in this court; and on the same day perfected the Testori appeal, which has become No. 5786 in this court.

In May counsel for appellant in these appeals, learning of the order of March 7, and of the claim that it was the final order from which alone an appeal could be taken, and that the time for appeal therefrom had expired before April 15, filed with the District Court his motion to vacate the order of March 7. This motion was denied, and, from this denial, the Union Trust Company has perfected the appeal which is now No. 5807 in this court. Appellees move to dismiss appeal No. 5807 because the District Court had no...