Floyd Davis Company v. Britton
This text of 221 F.2d 519 (Floyd Davis Company v. Britton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
95 U.S.App.D.C. 241
FLOYD E. DAVIS COMPANY, and Globe Indemnity Company, Appellants,
v.
Theodore BRITTON, Deputy Commissioner, District of Columbia
Compensation District, Bureau of Employees
Compensation, and Alice M. Casey and
James L. Casey, Jr., Appellees.
No. 12053.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Nov. 8, 1954.
Decided Nov. 18, 1954.
Mr. Francis W. McInerny, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Mr. S. Jay McCathran, Jr., Washington, D.C., was on the brief for appellant Floyd E. Davis Co.
Mr. Hugh Lynch, Jr., Washington, D.C., was on the brief for appellant Globe Indemnity Co.
Mr. Ward E. Boote, Asst. Sol., United States Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. Leo A. Rover, U.S. Atty., and Lewis Carroll, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee Britton. Mr. Jacob N. Halper, Washington, D.C., was on the brief for appellees Casey.
[95 U.S.App.D.C. 242] Before BAZELON, FAHY and DANAHER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court dismissing appellants' suit to enjoin the enforcement of a workman's compensation award. We find no error. The District Court's order is therefore
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
221 F.2d 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/floyd-davis-company-v-britton-cadc-1954.