Hockley v. Wilson

Fourth Circuit

Hockley v. Wilson

70 F.2d 108, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4077

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedApril 3, 1934

DocketNo. 3586

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 70 F.2d 108 (Hockley v. Wilson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hockley v. Wilson, 70 F.2d 108, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4077 (4th Cir. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons given in the opinion of Judge Chesnut in the District Court, Pyrites Co., Inc., v. Davison Chemical Co., 4 F. Supp. [109]*109294, it is held that compensation awards in Maryland under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 US CA 901 et seq.) are entitled to preference against the employer without limit of amount, and the decree of the District Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons given in the opinion of Judge Chesnut in the District Court, Pyrites Co., Inc., v. Davison Chemical Co., 4 F. Supp. [109]*109294, it is held that compensation awards in Maryland under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (33 US CA 901 et seq.) are entitled to preference against the employer without limit of amount, and the decree of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 F.2d 108, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hockley-v-wilson-ca4-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack