Hoover v. Wardman

District of Columbia

Hoover v. Wardman

59 F.2d 866, 61 App. D.C. 191, 1932 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedMay 31, 1932

DocketNo. 5473

StatusPublished

This text of 59 F.2d 866 (Hoover v. Wardman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hoover v. Wardman, 59 F.2d 866, 61 App. D.C. 191, 1932 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468 (D.D.C. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This ease was argued and submitted together with Cafritz Construction Co. v. Robert Mudrick and Fredy Mudrick, 61 App. D. C. 189, 59 F.(2d) 864, and involves the same issue this day decided by us therein. Consistently with our decision in that ease, the judgment of the lower court herein is reversed with costs, and this canse is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

ROBB, Associate Justice, dissents.

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

PER CURIAM.

This ease was argued and submitted together with Cafritz Construction Co. v. Robert Mudrick and Fredy Mudrick, 61 App. D. C. 189, 59 F.(2d) 864, and involves the same issue this day decided by us therein. Consistently with our decision in that ease, the judgment of the lower court herein is reversed with costs, and this canse is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

ROBB, Associate Justice, dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 F.2d 866, 61 App. D.C. 191, 1932 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoover-v-wardman-dcd-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack