Harrison v. Hicks
57 F.2d 1077, 1932 U.S. App. LEXIS 4149
Opinion
The deerees of the court below are affirmed on the authority of Byers v. McAuley, 149 U. S. 608, 13 S. Ct. 906, 37 L. Ed. 867; Yonley v. Lavender, 21 Wall. 276, 22 L. Ed. 536; Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank, 215 U. S. 33, 44, 30 S. Ct. 10, 54 L. Ed. 80; [1078]*1078Kline v. Burke Construction Co., 260 U. S. 226, 43 S. Ct. 79, 67 L. Ed. 226, 24 A. L. R. 1077; Covell v. Heyman, 111 U. S. 176, 4 S. Ct. 355, 28 L. Ed. 390, and First National Bank v. Purvis, 201 N. C. 753, 161 S. E. 386.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harrison v. Hicks, 57 F.2d 1077, 1932 U.S. App. LEXIS 4149 (4th Cir. 1932).
57 F.2d 1077 (Harrison v. Hicks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Yonley v. Lavender
88 U.S. 276 (Supreme Court, 1875)
Covell v. Heyman
111 U.S. 176 (Supreme Court, 1884)
Byers v. McAuley
149 U.S. 608 (Supreme Court, 1893)
Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co.
215 U.S. 33 (Supreme Court, 1909)
Kline v. Burke Construction Co.
260 U.S. 226 (Supreme Court, 1922)
First National Bank v. Purvis
161 S.E. 386 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)