Nathan Metz v. Tusico, Incorporated

Fourth Circuit

Nathan Metz v. Tusico, Incorporated

260 F.2d 957

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Nathan Metz v. Tusico, Incorporated. Read the opinion of the Court — 246 F.2d 54 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 17, 1958·No. 7685_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In an earlier appeal in this case we vacated the judgment for the defendantappellee and remanded the case to the District Court. Metz v. Tusico, Inc., 4 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 54. That Court then took further testimony and made additional findings, concluding that there was no breach by the appellee of its warranty that water was available to the property sold by it to the appellant, and rendered judgment for the appellee. We perceive no error in the Judge’s findings of fact or conclusions of law, and the judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the District Court’s opinion. 260 F.Supp. 393.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In an earlier appeal in this case we vacated the judgment for the defendantappellee and remanded the case to the District Court. Metz v. Tusico, Inc., 4 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 54. That Court then took further testimony and made additional findings, concluding that there was no breach by the appellee of its warranty that water was available to the property sold by it to the appellant, and rendered judgment for the appellee. We perceive no error in the Judge’s findings of fact or conclusions of law, and the judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the District Court’s opinion. 260 F.Supp. 393.

Affirmed.

Nathan Metz v. Tusico, Incorporated, 260 F.2d 957 (4th Cir. 1958).

Pincite

260 F.2d 957 (Nathan Metz v. Tusico, Incorporated) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related