Big Lake Oil Co. v. Heiner
67 F.2d 985, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 427, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 4713, 13 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 427
Opinion
In our view this case is but 'a necessary step in an effort to have the Supreme Court review and reverse its decision in Group No. 1 Oil Corporation v. Bass, 283 U. S. 279, 51 S. Ct. 432, 75 L. Ed. 1032. The facts in the present case are the same as in that one. Such being the situation, we affirm the judgment entered by the court below (2 F. Supp. 41), which rightly followed Group No. 1 Oil Corporation v. Bass, 283 U. S. 279, 51 S. Ct. 432, 75 L. Ed. 1032.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Big Lake Oil Co. v. Heiner, 67 F.2d 985, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 427, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 4713, 13 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 427 (3d Cir. 1933).
67 F.2d 985 (Big Lake Oil Co. v. Heiner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Group No. 1 Oil Corp. v. Bass
283 U.S. 279 (Supreme Court, 1931)
Big Lake Oil Co. v. Heiner
2 F. Supp. 41 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1932)