James L. Huston and Dayton Bait Company v. Buckeye Bait Corporation, Buckeye Molding Company, and William H. Robinson
This text of 237 F.2d 920 (James L. Huston and Dayton Bait Company v. Buckeye Bait Corporation, Buckeye Molding Company, and William H. Robinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The above cause coming on to be heard upon the transcript of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the argument of counsel, and the court being duly advised,
Now, therefore, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the judgment of the district court be and is hereby affirmed upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the district court and for the reasons set forth in the opinion of Judge Cecil. 145 F.Supp. 600.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
237 F.2d 920, 112 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-l-huston-and-dayton-bait-company-v-buckeye-bait-corporation-ca6-1956.