John E. Huber v. Byrd S. Huber

Sixth Circuit

John E. Huber v. Byrd S. Huber

229 F.2d 739, 49 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1666, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4992

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedNovember 7, 1955

Docket12384

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 229 F.2d 739 (John E. Huber v. Byrd S. Huber) 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.

Bluebook

John E. Huber v. Byrd S. Huber, 229 F.2d 739, 49 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1666, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4992 (6th Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The above cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the record, the *740 briefs of the parties, and argument of counsel in open court. Appellant contends that the district court rendered its judgment upon an agreed statement of facts to which appellant was not a party. The proofs, however, justified the conclusion that the material facts, as set forth in the above mentioned statement of facts, were approved by counsel for appellant; that motions for summary judgment filed by both parties were pending at the time the judgment of the district court was entered; that both parties had presented all relevant evidence which they had desired prior to adjudication; and that no Constitutional question was presented for determination, as contended by appellant. Upon a review of the testimony and upon consideration of the briefs and arguments of counsel, it is ordered that the judgment of the district court be and is hereby affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The above cause came on to be heard upon the transcript of the record, the *740 briefs of the parties, and argument of counsel in open court. Appellant contends that the district court rendered its judgment upon an agreed statement of facts to which appellant was not a party. The proofs, however, justified the conclusion that the material facts, as set forth in the above mentioned statement of facts, were approved by counsel for appellant; that motions for summary judgment filed by both parties were pending at the time the judgment of the district court was entered; that both parties had presented all relevant evidence which they had desired prior to adjudication; and that no Constitutional question was presented for determination, as contended by appellant. Upon a review of the testimony and upon consideration of the briefs and arguments of counsel, it is ordered that the judgment of the district court be and is hereby affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 F.2d 739, 49 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1666, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-e-huber-v-byrd-s-huber-ca6-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack