Notice of appeal to Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Plaintiff's attorney Charles H. Houston provides notice to the court and defense attorneys that they are appealing the case to the Eighth District Court of Appeals. Defense attorney William S.
Hogsett, William S.
Displaying 49 - 60 of 65
Letter from defense attorney William S. Hogsett to fellow defense attorneys Rubey M. Hulen to Kenneth Teasdale regarding Civil Case No. 128: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. He writes that he has noticed a typo in their response and asks that notification of the correct be made to the court and Bluford's attorney Carl R. Johnson.
Letter from defense attorney William S. Hogsett to U.S. District Court deputy clerk Charles Seibold regarding Civil Case No. 128: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Hogsett confirms receipt of Seibold's telegram informing him that Judge John Collet directed the Bluford motion be continued from Saturday to a future undecided date.
Telegram from the federal court clerk to defense attorney William S. Hogsett in Civil Case No. 128: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, writing that Judge John C. Collet directs a Bluford motion to be continued from Saturday to an undecided future date.
Bluford vs. Canada, Civil Action No. 42: Letter from William S. Hogsett to U.S. District Court Clerk
Letter from attorney William S. Hogsett to the clerk of the U.S. District Court, regarding Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, to submit the defendant's motion to dismiss.
Letter from defense attorney William S. Hogsett to the U.S. District Court clerk in Civil Case No. 128: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Hogsett writes that he is enclosing a defendant's motion to require the plaintiff to make changes to their statement under Rule 12(e).
Bluford vs. Canada, Civil Action No. 42: Letter from William S. Hogsett to U.S. District Court Clerk
Letter from attorney William S. Hogsett to the clerk of the U.S. District Court, regarding Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada, notifying the court of his intention, along with Senator Nick T. Cave, to represent the defendant, and to file a motion to dismiss the complaint.
Brief in support of defendant's motion to dismiss in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The defendant's attorneys argue for the dismal of Bluford's suit against Canada, the registrar of the University of Missouri, stating that she has no standing for the damages she seeks.
Reply brief of defendant on motion to dismiss in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The document responds to a memo by Bluford's attorneys, which in turn responds to Canada's attorneys brief requesting dismissal of the case.
Motion to dismiss in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. The defendant's attorneys argue for the dismal of Bluford's suit against Canada, the registrar of the University of Missouri, stating that she has no standing for the damages she seeks.
Defendant's motion for directed verdict in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada.
Motion for new trial in Civil Action No. 42: Lucile Bluford v. S.W. Canada. Bluford requests that the court set aside the verdict against her of October 24, 1940, and grant a new trial. Her attorneys argue that the court erred in numerous ways, and that the verdict did not conform to the law.