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.
General
The CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST CO., BAINBRIDGE, GEORGIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. LOUIS TERMINAL WAREHOUSE CO., Defendant-Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee. Howell MATHIS, etc., et al., Third-Party Defendants-Appellees
515 F.2d 1382·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1975
Before COLEMAN, MORGAN and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
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 CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST CO., BAINBRIDGE, GEORGIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. LOUIS TERMINAL WAREHOUSE CO., Defendant-Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellee. Howell MATHIS, etc., et al., Third-Party Defendants-Appellees.
No. 74-2718.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 18, 1975.
Harold Lambert, Bainbridge, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant.
Edward E. Dorsey, Stuart E. Eizen-stat, Atlanta, Ga., for defendants-appel-lees.
Before COLEMAN, MORGAN and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:]
PER CURIAM:
Upon briefs, and oral argument heard in this case at Atlanta, Georgia, on May 20, 1975, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed on the basis of its published opinion, Citizens Bank and Trust Company v. SLT Warehouse Company, 368 F.Supp. 1042 (M.D.Ga., 1974).
Affirmed.