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.
CLEARY BROTHERS, Inc., Libelant-Appellee, v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY, Respondent-Appellee, and Edward G. Murray Lighterage & Transportation Company, Respondent-Impleaded-Appellant, 1931 — 46 F.2d 1012 · caselaw · US
General
CLEARY BROTHERS, Inc., Libelant-Appellee, v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY, Respondent-Appellee, and Edward G. Murray Lighterage & Transportation Company, Respondent-Impleaded-Appellant
46 F.2d 1012·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1931
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
CLEARY BROTHERS, Inc., Libelant-Appellee, v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY, Respondent-Appellee, and Edward G. Murray Lighterage & Transportation Company, Respondent-Impleaded-Appellant.
No. 226.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Feb. 2, 1931.
Foley & Martin, of New York City, for appellant Edward G. Murray Lighterage & Transportation Co.
John R. McMullen, of New York City, for appellee Cleary Bros., Inc.
Burlingham, Yeeder, Fearey, Clark & Hupper, of New York City (Chauneey I. Clark and Norman M. Barron, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellee Pennsylvania R. Co.
Before MANTON, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree affirmed.