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.
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. OVERMAN CUSHION TIRE CO., Inc., 1931 — 61 F.2d 1028 · caselaw · US
General
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. OVERMAN CUSHION TIRE CO., Inc.
61 F.2d 1028·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. OVERMAN CUSHION TIRE CO., Inc.
No. 6004.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Nov. 13, 1931.
Richey & Watts and Tolies, Hogsett & Ginn, all of Cleveland, Ohio, for appellant.
Bates, Golriek & Teare and Day & Day, all of Cleveland, Ohio, and R. W. Byerly, of New York City, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree of District Court affirmed.