George T. Daley v. Sears, Roebuck & Company

Sixth Circuit

George T. Daley v. Sears, Roebuck & Company

182 F.2d 347, 58 Ohio Law. Abs. 18, 42 Ohio App. 292, 42 Ohio Op. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedApril 20, 1950

Docket11067_1

StatusPublished

This text of 182 F.2d 347 (George T. Daley v. Sears, Roebuck & Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George T. Daley v. Sears, Roebuck & Company, 182 F.2d 347, 58 Ohio Law. Abs. 18, 42 Ohio App. 292, 42 Ohio Op. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798 (6th Cir. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause was heard upon the record, briefs and argument of counsel;

And the Court being of the opinion that the ruling is controlled by Steinbeck v. John Hauck Brewing Co., 7 Ohio App. 18 and Turoff v. Richmond, 76 Ohio App. 83, 61 N.E.2d 486. See also: Den Braven v. Public Service Electric & Gas Co., 115 N.J.L. 543, 181 A. 46; Abar v. Ramsey Motor Service, 195 Minn. 597, 263 N.W. 917; Bennett v. McGoldrick-Sanderson Co., 15 Wash.2d 130, 142-144, 129 P.2d 795.

On the authority of said cases and for the reasons stated by the District Judge in his Memorandum Opinion, it is ordered that the Judgment of the District Court he affirmed. 90 F.Supp. 561.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause was heard upon the record, briefs and argument of counsel;

And the Court being of the opinion that the ruling is controlled by Steinbeck v. John Hauck Brewing Co., 7 Ohio App. 18 and Turoff v. Richmond, 76 Ohio App. 83, 61 N.E.2d 486. See also: Den Braven v. Public Service Electric & Gas Co., 115 N.J.L. 543, 181 A. 46; Abar v. Ramsey Motor Service, 195 Minn. 597, 263 N.W. 917; Bennett v. McGoldrick-Sanderson Co., 15 Wash.2d 130, 142-144, 129 P.2d 795.

On the authority of said cases and for the reasons stated by the District Judge in his Memorandum Opinion, it is ordered that the Judgment of the District Court he affirmed. 90 F.Supp. 561.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 F.2d 347, 58 Ohio Law. Abs. 18, 42 Ohio App. 292, 42 Ohio Op. 292, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-t-daley-v-sears-roebuck-company-ca6-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack