Geare v. Sturgis

D.C. Circuit

Geare v. Sturgis

14 F.2d 256, 56 App. D.C. 364, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2028

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 10, 1926

DocketNo. 4032

StatusPublished

This text of 14 F.2d 256 (Geare v. Sturgis) 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.

Bluebook

Geare v. Sturgis, 14 F.2d 256, 56 App. D.C. 364, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2028 (D.C. Cir. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

MARTIN, Chief Justice.

We think that the issues involved in this appeal are essentially similar to those in John H. Ford, Appellant, v. Guy Sturgis, Administrator of the estate of Victor M. Sturgis, Deceased, Appellee (Appeal No. 4026) 14 F.(2d) 253; the decision in that appeal being handed down concurrently .herewith. It is true that the appellant in that ease was a contractor furnishing material and services in the construction of the building, whereas the present appellant was the architect of the building; but we think that fact is immaterial. Consistently with the decision in the former case, the order of the lower court challenged by this appeal is reversed, with costs, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

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

MARTIN, Chief Justice.

We think that the issues involved in this appeal are essentially similar to those in John H. Ford, Appellant, v. Guy Sturgis, Administrator of the estate of Victor M. Sturgis, Deceased, Appellee (Appeal No. 4026) 14 F.(2d) 253; the decision in that appeal being handed down concurrently .herewith. It is true that the appellant in that ease was a contractor furnishing material and services in the construction of the building, whereas the present appellant was the architect of the building; but we think that fact is immaterial. Consistently with the decision in the former case, the order of the lower court challenged by this appeal is reversed, with costs, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 F.2d 256, 56 App. D.C. 364, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 2028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geare-v-sturgis-cadc-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack