Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
J. Bradford ERB, Plaintiff Appellant, v. CLAREMONT LABORATORIES, Inc., and Capitol Machine Company, Inc., Defendants Appellees, 1928 — 29 F.2d 1021 · caselaw · US
General
J. Bradford ERB, Plaintiff Appellant, v. CLAREMONT LABORATORIES, Inc., and Capitol Machine Company, Inc., Defendants Appellees
29 F.2d 1021·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1928
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
J. Bradford ERB, Plaintiff Appellant, v. CLAREMONT LABORATORIES, Inc., and Capitol Machine Company, Inc., Defendants Appellees.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
December 3, 1928.
No. 65.
Henry Amerman, of New York City (J. B. Erb, of counsel), for appellant.
C. P. Goepel, of New York City, for ap-pellees.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and SWAN, Circuit Judges.
Certiorari denied 49 S. Ct. 252, 73 L. Ed. —.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Deeree affirmed.