Sherwin-Williams Co. v. International Color & Chemiical Co.

Sixth Circuit

Sherwin-Williams Co. v. International Color & Chemiical Co.

18 F.2d 1021, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2152

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMay 9, 1927

DocketNo. 4757

StatusPublished

This text of 18 F.2d 1021 (Sherwin-Williams Co. v. International Color & Chemiical Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sherwin-Williams Co. v. International Color & Chemiical Co., 18 F.2d 1021, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2152 (6th Cir. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only question involved in this appeal is the right to have relief upon an original bill, in the nature of a bill of review, which the court below, after permitting to be filed, dismissed upon final hearing. Quite obviously, the plaintiff in this bill has no claim to unsettle the former decree after the several years which have elapsed, unless upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, and it is clear to us that upon the merits of this claim plaintiff fails. Whether the former decree operates as an adjudication in the manner claimed is not now involved, and passing this and all other questions we find that the-newly discovered evidence is not of substantial importance upon the issue which plaintiff seeks to have reopened.

The decree is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The only question involved in this appeal is the right to have relief upon an original bill, in the nature of a bill of review, which the court below, after permitting to be filed, dismissed upon final hearing. Quite obviously, the plaintiff in this bill has no claim to unsettle the former decree after the several years which have elapsed, unless upon the ground of newly discovered evidence, and it is clear to us that upon the merits of this claim plaintiff fails. Whether the former decree operates as an adjudication in the manner claimed is not now involved, and passing this and all other questions we find that the-newly discovered evidence is not of substantial importance upon the issue which plaintiff seeks to have reopened.

The decree is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 F.2d 1021, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 2152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherwin-williams-co-v-international-color-chemiical-co-ca6-1927.