In the Matter of J. Jay Vandergrift. Marjorie Holmes Vandergrift

341 F.2d 921, 146 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6333
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 4, 1965·No. 14999_1·Published

Opinion

341 F.2d 921

In the Matter of J. Jay VANDERGRIFT.
Marjorie Holmes Vandergrift, Appellant.

No. 14999.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued Feb. 19, 1965.
Decided March 4, 1965.

Howard I. Scott and Kountz, Fry & Meyer, Pittsburgh, Pa. (A. E. Kountz, Lawrence B. Niemann, Tice F., Ryan, Jr., and Ryan, Newman Geer & Goldring, Pittsburgh, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Henry C. Herchenroether, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa. (Alter, Wright & Barron, Pittsburgh, Pa., James F. McMullan, Clark, Ladner, Fortenbaugh & Young, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellees.

Before KALODNER and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and KIRKPATRICK, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

On review of the record we find no error.

The Order of the District Court will be affirmed for the reasons so well stated in the Opinion of Judge Wilson reported at 232 F.Supp. 857 (W.D.Pa.1964).

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

In the Matter of J. Jay Vandergrift. Marjorie Holmes Vandergrift, 341 F.2d 921, 146 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6333 (3d Cir. 1965).

341 F.2d 921 (In the Matter of J. Jay Vandergrift. Marjorie Holmes Vandergrift) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Vandergrift
232 F. Supp. 857 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1964)