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.
CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY v. James B. MOORE, 1934 — 69 F.2d 995 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY v. James B. MOORE
69 F.2d 995·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·1934
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
CHESAPEAKE & OHIO RAILWAY COMPANY v. James B. MOORE.
No. 4779.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
April 21, 1934.
See, also, 64 F.(2d) 472.
Albert H. Cole, of Peru, Ind., for appellant.
Chester L. Teeter and Uoyd Hartzler, both of Port Wayne, Ind., for appellee.
Before EYANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Now this day come the parties by their counsel and present and file a stipulation of counsel to dismiss this appeal, which said stipulation is in the words and figures following, to wit: “The parties hereto hereby stipulate that this appeal shall be dismissed and that each party shall pay his own costs.”
On consideration whereof: It is now here ordered and adjudged by this court that this appeal be, and the same is hereby, dismissed pursuant to the above stipulation.