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.
HERMES STEAM CONTROLLER CO., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK STEAM CORPORATION and F. E. Pendleton, Defendants-Appellees, 1928 — 23 F.2d 1001 · caselaw · US
Corporations
HERMES STEAM CONTROLLER CO., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK STEAM CORPORATION and F. E. Pendleton, Defendants-Appellees
23 F.2d 1001·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
HERMES STEAM CONTROLLER CO., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK STEAM CORPORATION and F. E. Pendleton, Defendants-Appellees.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
January 9, 1928.
No. 94.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
Newell & Spencer, of New York City (E. E. Newell and George M. Dowe, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Ilowson & Ilowson, of New York City (Hubert Ilowson and Benjamin T. Eauber, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellees.
Before MANTON, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PEE CURIAM.]
PEE CURIAM.
Decree affirmed, with costs.