Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Dimock

Second Circuit

Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Dimock

210 F.2d 376

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided February 5, 1954·No. No. 22961·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner charges that Judge Dimock disregarded our mandate in Bernstein v. N. V. Nederlandsehe-Amerikaansche Stoomvaart-Maatschappij (Chemical Bank & Trust Co.), 2 Cir., 173 F.2d 71, 75-76, but since we have amended our mandate in this case, 2 Cir., 210 F.2d 375, we find it unnecessary to pass on the validity of the petitioner’s contentions or the propriety of resort to mandamus.

Petition denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner charges that Judge Dimock disregarded our mandate in Bernstein v. N. V. Nederlandsehe-Amerikaansche Stoomvaart-Maatschappij (Chemical Bank & Trust Co.), 2 Cir., 173 F.2d 71, 75-76, but since we have amended our mandate in this case, 2 Cir., 210 F.2d 375, we find it unnecessary to pass on the validity of the petitioner’s contentions or the propriety of resort to mandamus.

Petition denied.

Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Dimock, 210 F.2d 376 (2d Cir. 1954).

Pincite

210 F.2d 376 (Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Dimock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related