Legerlotz v. Rogers

Supreme Court

Legerlotz v. Rogers

361 U.S. 808, 80 S. Ct. 76, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 386

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 12, 1959·No. No. 213·Published

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals for the District-of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari granted. Counsel are directed to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments, among other questions, the question whether the amendment of a “Return Order,” as opposed to a “Notice of Intention to Return,” is permissible, under the pertinent regulations or otherwise, and, if not, the effect of such an amendment on' the pertinent limitations period.

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

United States Court of Appeals for the District-of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari granted. Counsel are directed to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments, among other questions, the question whether the amendment of a “Return Order,” as opposed to a “Notice of Intention to Return,” is permissible, under the pertinent regulations or otherwise, and, if not, the effect of such an amendment on' the pertinent limitations period.

Legerlotz v. Rogers, 361 U.S. 808, 80 S. Ct. 76, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 386 (1959).

Pincite

361 U.S. 808 (Legerlotz v. Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.