Gochenour v. George and Frances Ball Foundation

117 F.2d 259, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4216
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided January 21, 1941·No. 7338·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

From an order dismissing the amended bill of complaint plaintiffs prosecute this appeal. At the time of dismissal Judge Baltzell filed an' exhaustive and able opinion, containing a full statement of facts and elaborate reasons for his action, which opinion has since been published in D.C., 35 F.Supp. 508. A study of the record convinces us that the action of the ’District Court was sound and we hereby adopt by reference the opinion of the District Judge as the opinion of this court.

The motion of appellees to dismiss the appeal is denied, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

Gochenour v. George and Frances Ball Foundation, 117 F.2d 259, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4216 (7th Cir. 1941).

117 F.2d 259 (Gochenour v. George and Frances Ball Foundation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miller v. Krause (In Re Krause)
114 B.R. 582 (N.D. Indiana, 1988)
Stein v. United Artists Corp.
691 F.2d 885 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)
Fred Stein v. United Artists Corporation
691 F.2d 885 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)
Management Investors v. United Mine Workers
610 F.2d 384 (Sixth Circuit, 1979)
Roach v. Reldan Trading Corporation
321 F.2d 42 (Second Circuit, 1963)
Roach v. Reldan Trading Corp.
321 F.2d 42 (Second Circuit, 1963)