Willard C. Beach Air Brush Co. v. General Motors Corp.

Third Circuit

Willard C. Beach Air Brush Co. v. General Motors Corp.

214 F.2d 664

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedJune 30, 1954

DocketNo. 11292

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 214 F.2d 664 (Willard C. Beach Air Brush Co. v. General Motors Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Willard C. Beach Air Brush Co. v. General Motors Corp., 214 F.2d 664 (3d Cir. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

For the earlier history of this case see 88 F.Supp. 849, and 118 F.Supp. 242. On the last appeal we reversed an order of the court below denying a motion by the plaintiff to vacate and set aside a judgment of discontinuance with prejudice because it had been entered pursuant to the written consent of counsel for the plaintiff at a time when the authority of the attorney to act for the plaintiff had been withdrawn. We also directed the court below on remand to permit the filing of the defendants’ plea of accord and satisfaction and to hear and dispose of that plea in limine. 3 Cir., 184 F.2d 569. This has been done and a judgment entered in favor of the defendants 118 F. Supp. 242. No error was committed by the court below. The appeal at bar is without merit. It is time that this prolonged litigation was brought to an end. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

For the earlier history of this case see 88 F.Supp. 849, and 118 F.Supp. 242. On the last appeal we reversed an order of the court below denying a motion by the plaintiff to vacate and set aside a judgment of discontinuance with prejudice because it had been entered pursuant to the written consent of counsel for the plaintiff at a time when the authority of the attorney to act for the plaintiff had been withdrawn. We also directed the court below on remand to permit the filing of the defendants’ plea of accord and satisfaction and to hear and dispose of that plea in limine. 3 Cir., 184 F.2d 569. This has been done and a judgment entered in favor of the defendants 118 F. Supp. 242. No error was committed by the court below. The appeal at bar is without merit. It is time that this prolonged litigation was brought to an end. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 F.2d 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willard-c-beach-air-brush-co-v-general-motors-corp-ca3-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack