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.
Corporations
GENERAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, a Corporation, Appellant, v. James RINELLA, Appellee
63 F.2d 1004·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1933
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
GENERAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA, a Corporation, Appellant, v. James RINELLA, Appellee.
No. 6978.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
March 6, 1933.
A. L. Weil, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Reynolds, Flegel & Smith, Arthur S. Vosburg, and F. P. Keenan, all of Portland, Or., for appellee.
Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and MACK, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon motion of counsel for appellee to dismiss appeal, ordered appeal dismissed for failure of appellant to file printed brief before argument; mandate forthwith.