Sprague Specialties Co. v. Mershon

73 F.2d 379, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2709
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided November 10, 1934·No. No. 2880·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The decree appealed from rested solely on the decree in the New York case, Mershon v. O’Neill (D. C.) 3 F. Supp. 26. As that decree has now been reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, there is nothing on which the decree before us can stand. In this situation the proper course is for us to reverse the decree appealed from and remand the case for further proceedings. Butler v. Eaton, 141 U. S. 240, 11 S. Ct. 985, 35 L. Ed. 713; Ransom v. City of Pierre (C. C. A.) 101 F. 665, 670; Du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Richmond Guano Co. (C. C. A.) 297 F. 580. See Deposit Bank v. Board of Councilmen of Frankfort, 191 U. S. 499, 24 S. Ct. 154, 48 L. Ed. 276.

The decree of the District Court is reversed, with costs to the appellant, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings.

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

Sprague Specialties Co. v. Mershon, 73 F.2d 379, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2709 (1st Cir. 1934).

73 F.2d 379 (Sprague Specialties Co. v. Mershon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Illinois Cent. R. Co., Inc. v. Olberding
214 F.2d 91 (Seventh Circuit, 1954)