United States v. The Claycraft Co.

408 F.2d 366, 23 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 966, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 8765
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 26, 1969
Docket18792_1
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 408 F.2d 366 (United States v. The Claycraft 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
United States v. The Claycraft Co., 408 F.2d 366, 23 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 966, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 8765 (6th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

ORDER

This appeal having come on to be heard; and the court having considered the briefs, appendix, record and argument on appeal; and it appearing that the opinion of the District Court does not satisfy the requirements of Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. Rule 52(a), 28 U.S.C. in that the facts are not found specially to permit appropriate review by this court and to support the ultimate conclusions of the trial court; upon consideration, it is ordered that the judgment be and *367 it hereby is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to make findings of facts, state conclusions of law, and enter proper judgment. Deal v. Cincinnati Bd. of Ed., 369 F.2d 55 (6th Cir. 1966), cert. den. 389 U.S. 847, 88 S.Ct. 39, 19 L.Ed.2d 114.

This remand does not restrict the discretion of the District Court on motion or sua sponte to permit either party to reopen and submit further proof.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
408 F.2d 366, 23 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 966, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 8765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-the-claycraft-co-ca6-1969.