Fleischmann Const. Co. v. United States ex rel. Forsberg
298 F. 330, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2653
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 10, 1924·No. No. 2196·Published·Cited by 9 cases
Opinion
The defendants in error insist that there is nothing before
this court because exceptions were not duly taken. The point is serious, but we prefer to rest the affirmance of the judgment on the merits. We think the District Court (298 Fed. 320) was clearly right on all the points decided, and that nothing of substance can be added to the reasoning of the court.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fleischmann Const. Co. v. United States ex rel. Forsberg, 298 F. 330, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2653 (4th Cir. 1924).
298 F. 330 (Fleischmann Const. Co. v. United States ex rel. Forsberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Golden West Construction Company v. United States
304 F.2d 753 (Tenth Circuit, 1962)
Golden West Construction Co. v. United States ex rel. Bernadot
304 F.2d 753 (Tenth Circuit, 1962)
United States Ex Rel. Noland Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.
38 F. Supp. 479 (D. Maryland, 1941)
United States Ex Rel. Johnson v. Morley Const. Co.
17 F. Supp. 378 (W.D. New York, 1936)
Alexander Pickering & Co. v. Chinese American Cold Storage Ass'n
71 F.2d 895 (Ninth Circuit, 1934)
First Nat. Bank of San Rafael v. Philippine Refining Corp. of New York
51 F.2d 218 (Ninth Circuit, 1931)
United States Ex Rel. Baltimore Cooperage Co. v. McCay
28 F.2d 777 (D. Maryland, 1928)
Fleischmann Construction Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Forsberg
270 U.S. 349 (Supreme Court, 1926)
Fleischmann Construction Co. v. United States ex rel. Forsberg
298 F. 1020 (Fourth Circuit, 1924)