Royal Indemnity v. Cardillo
This text of 302 U.S. 736 (Royal Indemnity v. Cardillo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
302 U.S. 736
58 S.Ct. 122
82 L.Ed. 569
ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, a corporation, et al., petitioners,
v.
Frank A. CARDILLO, Deputy Commissioner, United States Employees' Compensation Commission and James S. Rennie.*
No. 411.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 25, 1937
Messrs. Norman B. Frost, Frank H. Myers ad Frederic N. Towers, all of Washington, D. C., for petitioners.
Mr. James E. McCabe, of Washington, D. C., for respondent Rennie.
Messrs. Stanley Reed, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., and Sam E. Whitaker, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Henry A. Julicher, of Washington, D. C., for respondent Frank A. Cardillo.
For opinion below, see Hoage v. Royal Ind. Co., 67 App.D.C. 142, 90 F.(2d) 387.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied.
Rehearing denied 302 U.S. 778, 58 S.Ct. 270, 82 L.Ed. ——.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
302 U.S. 736, 58 S. Ct. 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/royal-indemnity-v-cardillo-scotus-1937.