Vincent A. Sheehy III v. Edwin H. Estes

Fifth Circuit

Vincent A. Sheehy III v. Edwin H. Estes

324 F.2d 502

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided December 18, 1963·No. 20504·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In deciding the plaintiffs’ claim in an action where jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship, the district court severed a counterclaim for future disposition, and thereafter entered a judgment, from which this appeal stems, against the appellants. Some of the specifications of error raise questions of Alabama law which we think were properly decided by the district court. The other contentions of the appellants present procedural questions, and as to these we conclude that no error is apparent and no prejudice is shown. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In deciding the plaintiffs’ claim in an action where jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship, the district court severed a counterclaim for future disposition, and thereafter entered a judgment, from which this appeal stems, against the appellants. Some of the specifications of error raise questions of Alabama law which we think were properly decided by the district court. The other contentions of the appellants present procedural questions, and as to these we conclude that no error is apparent and no prejudice is shown. The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Vincent A. Sheehy III v. Edwin H. Estes, 324 F.2d 502 (5th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

324 F.2d 502 (Vincent A. Sheehy III v. Edwin H. Estes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.