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.
Hyman HUEBSCHMAN, Doing Business under the Name and Style of Ritz Perfume Company, Defendant-Appellant, v. PINAUD, Incorporated, Plaintiff Appellee, 1928 — 27 F.2d 538 · caselaw · US
General
Hyman HUEBSCHMAN, Doing Business under the Name and Style of Ritz Perfume Company, Defendant-Appellant, v. PINAUD, Incorporated, Plaintiff Appellee
27 F.2d 538·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1928
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
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
Hyman HUEBSCHMAN, Doing Business under the Name and Style of Ritz Perfume Company, Defendant-Appellant, v. PINAUD, Incorporated, Plaintiff Appellee.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 25, 1928.
No. 359.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York.
Davies, Auerbach So Cornell, of New York City (Marion Butler and Alexander J. Eeild, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Hoguet & Neary, of New York City (Daniel L. Morris, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree (27 F.(2d) 531) affirmed.