Case Name: ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. McLELLAND
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1894-05-21
Citations: 62 F. 118
Docket Number: No. 292
Parties: ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. McLELLAND.
Judges: Before CALDWELL and SANBORN, Circuit Judges, and THAYER, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 62
Pages: 118–119

Head Matter:
ST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. McLELLAND.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
May 21, 1894.)
No. 292.
Second Writ or Error Unnecessarily Sued Out — Dismissal.
After reversal of a judgment on writ of error, for errors committed at tlie trial, a second writ, sued out to correct alleged errors in taxation of costs after rendition of judgment, which might have been incorporated in the same record, will he dismissed at the cost of plaintiff in error.
In Error to the United States Court in the Indian Territory.
This was an action by John McLelland against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Company, in which plaintiff recovered judgment, and defendant brought error. 62 Fed. 116. Defendant also sued out a second writ of error to review alleged errors after rendition of judgment.
L. F. Parker (Edward I). Kenna and IE. S. Abbott, on tbe brief), for plaintiff in error.
T. P. Winchester and W. T. Hutchings filed a brief for defendant in error.
Before CALDWELL and SANBORN, Circuit Judges, and THAYER, District Judge.

Opinion:
THAYER, District Judge.
This is a second writ of error which was sued out in this case, after a first writ of error had been granted to obtain a reversal of the judgment for errors committed at the trial. The present writ was sued out to correct alleged errors of the trial court in the taxation of costs after the rendition of judgment. As we have already reversed the judgment in this case, on which the liability to pay the disputed costs depends (62 Fed. 116), and as there was no apparent necessity for suing out the second writ, inasmuch as all of the assigned errors might have been incorporated in one and the same record, the second writ of error should be dismissed at the cost of the plaintiff in error, and it is so ordered.