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.
THE NORTH RIVER. THE RICHARD PECK. THE RUSSELL NO. 7. ARUNDEL CORPORATION v. NEW ENGLAND S. S. CO. et al., 1932 — 57 F.2d 601 · caselaw · US
Corporations
THE NORTH RIVER. THE RICHARD PECK. THE RUSSELL NO. 7. ARUNDEL CORPORATION v. NEW ENGLAND S. S. CO. et al.
57 F.2d 601·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1932
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
THE NORTH RIVER. THE RICHARD PECK. THE RUSSELL NO. 7. ARUNDEL CORPORATION v. NEW ENGLAND S. S. CO. et al.
No. 270.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 7, 1932.
Haight, Smith, Griffin & Doming, of New York City (John W. Griffin, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Alexander, Ash & Jones, of New York City (Edward Ash and Lawson R. Jonés, both of New York City, of counsel), for ap-pellee the Russell No. 7.
Before L. HAND, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree (57 F.(2d) 600) affirmed.