Cannady v. Fassio

Third Circuit

Cannady v. Fassio

358 F.2d 304, 1966 A.M.C. 2433

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 22, 1966

DocketNo. 15456

StatusPublished

This text of 358 F.2d 304 (Cannady v. Fassio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cannady v. Fassio, 358 F.2d 304, 1966 A.M.C. 2433 (3d Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have considered the issue raised by the libellant-appellant that he is entitled to prejudgment interest. An examination of the record, however, convinces us that the trial judge did not err in not allowing him such interest. Cf. Noel v. United Aircraft Corporation, 342 F.2d 232, 240 (3 Cir. 1965); Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc. v. Richardson, 295 F.2d 583 (2 Cir. 1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 989, 82 S.Ct. 606, 7 L.Ed.2d 526 (1962), and National Airlines, Inc. v. Stiles, 268 F.2d 400 (5 Cir. 1959), cert. denied 361 U.S. 885, 80 S.Ct. 157, 4 L.Ed.2d 121 (1959). Upon a review of the entire record and consideration of the arguments of the parties we perceive no error. Consequently, the judgment will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We have considered the issue raised by the libellant-appellant that he is entitled to prejudgment interest. An examination of the record, however, convinces us that the trial judge did not err in not allowing him such interest. Cf. Noel v. United Aircraft Corporation, 342 F.2d 232, 240 (3 Cir. 1965); Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc. v. Richardson, 295 F.2d 583 (2 Cir. 1961), cert. denied 368 U.S. 989, 82 S.Ct. 606, 7 L.Ed.2d 526 (1962), and National Airlines, Inc. v. Stiles, 268 F.2d 400 (5 Cir. 1959), cert. denied 361 U.S. 885, 80 S.Ct. 157, 4 L.Ed.2d 121 (1959). Upon a review of the entire record and consideration of the arguments of the parties we perceive no error. Consequently, the judgment will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

358 F.2d 304, 1966 A.M.C. 2433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannady-v-fassio-ca3-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack