
    MEANS v. DOWD.
    APPEAL ERÓM THE CIRCUIT COURT 0E THE UNITED STATES EOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT QE NORTH CAROLINA.
    No. 47.
    Submitted and decided December 17, 1888.
    The court denies a motion for an order for a mandate, no notice of it having been given to the other party.
    It has been the custom with the court to make a general order, immediately before the commencement of the February recess, for the issue of mandates in every case disposed of prior to the 1st of January, if application therefor should be made, except in cases in which a .petition for rehearing might be pending, and cases docketed and dismissed under the 9th rule. In this case, which is reported ante, page 273, application was made to the court for the immediate issue of a mandate, without giving the other party notice of the intention to make such a motion.
    
      Mr. W. W. Flemmg for the motion.
    No one opposing.
   Per Curiam :

No notice having been given to the other side, and there being no agreement of the parties that the mandate may issue, the motion is

Denied.

Chappell v. Bradshaw. Error to the Court of Appeals of the State of Maryland. No. 1037.' This case' is reported- ante, page 132. A like motion under a like circumstance being made for the issue of a mandate, it was denied, but the court informed the counsel that he was at liberty to file his motion and give notice, which he elected to do.  