McDowell v. Heiner
15 F.2d 1015, 6 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 6451, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3104, 6 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 6451
Opinion
The opinion of the court below, reported at 9 F.(2d) 120, is so full and satisfactory that a further one by this court cannot perforce be but an attempt to restate what that court satisfactorily said. We therefore restrict ourselves to adopting its opinion and affirming its decree, dismissing plaintiff’s biR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McDowell v. Heiner, 15 F.2d 1015, 6 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 6451, 1926 U.S. App. LEXIS 3104, 6 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 6451 (3d Cir. 1926).
15 F.2d 1015 (McDowell v. Heiner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Frank Irey, Jr., Inc., a Corporation v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
519 F.2d 1200 (Third Circuit, 1975)