Ehret Magnesia Mfg. Co. v. Lungwitz

Third Circuit

Ehret Magnesia Mfg. Co. v. Lungwitz

237 F. 1017, 150 C.C.A. 665

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided January 10, 1917·No. No. 2128·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This writ of error has been argued twice, but we regret to find ourselves still uncertain about the meaning (taken as a whole) of the litigated clauses in this contract, as the case comes before us at a stage when no testimony has been taken. We hope and expect that these difficulties may be removed when the testimony discloses the situation of the parties at the date of the agreement, and that what is now obscure may thus, if possible, be cleared up. Solely for this reason we feel constrained to reverse the judgment, and to direct the District Court to proceed to a trial.

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

PER CURIAM.

This writ of error has been argued twice, but we regret to find ourselves still uncertain about the meaning (taken as a whole) of the litigated clauses in this contract, as the case comes before us at a stage when no testimony has been taken. We hope and expect that these difficulties may be removed when the testimony discloses the situation of the parties at the date of the agreement, and that what is now obscure may thus, if possible, be cleared up. Solely for this reason we feel constrained to reverse the judgment, and to direct the District Court to proceed to a trial.

Ehret Magnesia Mfg. Co. v. Lungwitz, 237 F. 1017, 150 C.C.A. 665 (3d Cir. 1917).

Pincite

237 F. 1017 (Ehret Magnesia Mfg. Co. v. Lungwitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.