Miller v. Gillette

Second Circuit

Miller v. Gillette

267 F.2d 783

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided June 15, 1959·No. No. 316, Docket 25469·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In Miller v. Town of Suffield, 2 Cir., 249 F.2d 16, we affirmed Judge Smith’s dismissal of plaintiff's antitrust action which we characterized as an attempt to revive certain “fantastic claims of fraud and conspiracy” rejected in earlier litigation. The Supreme Court denied certiorari, 356 U.S. 978, 78 S.Ct. 1143, 2 L.Ed.2d 1151, and then a motion for rehearing, 358 U.S. 859, 79 S.Ct. 16, 3 L.Ed.2d 93. After our affirmance Judge Smith, on motion of certain defendants, dissolved an attachment pendente lite upon their property and plaintiff has appealed. She has failed, however, to show any reason why the order was not only within the power of the district court, but also required upon the termination of her action. Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In Miller v. Town of Suffield, 2 Cir., 249 F.2d 16, we affirmed Judge Smith’s dismissal of plaintiff's antitrust action which we characterized as an attempt to revive certain “fantastic claims of fraud and conspiracy” rejected in earlier litigation. The Supreme Court denied certiorari, 356 U.S. 978, 78 S.Ct. 1143, 2 L.Ed.2d 1151, and then a motion for rehearing, 358 U.S. 859, 79 S.Ct. 16, 3 L.Ed.2d 93. After our affirmance Judge Smith, on motion of certain defendants, dissolved an attachment pendente lite upon their property and plaintiff has appealed. She has failed, however, to show any reason why the order was not only within the power of the district court, but also required upon the termination of her action. Affirmed.

Miller v. Gillette, 267 F.2d 783 (2d Cir. 1959).

Pincite

267 F.2d 783 (Miller v. Gillette) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related