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
UNITED STATES SHIPPING BOARD EMERGENCY FLEET CORPORATION and J. H. Winchester & Co., Plaintiffs in Error (Defendants Below), v. Ewald LATCHING, Defendant in Error (Plaintiff Below)
5 F.2d 1023·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1925
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
UNITED STATES SHIPPING BOARD EMERGENCY FLEET CORPORATION and J. H. Winchester & Co., Plaintiffs in Error (Defendants Below), v. Ewald LATCHING, Defendant in Error (Plaintiff Below).
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
February 20, 1925.)
No. 253.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Writ of error to judgment on the verdict of a jury entered in the District Court for the Southern District of New York.
William Hayward, U. S. Atty., of New York City (J. Ralph Hilton, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff in error U. S. Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation.
Nathan A. Smyth, of New York City, for plaintiff in error J. H. Winchester Co. Edgar J. Treacy, of New York City, for defendant in error.
Before HOUGH, MANTON, and HAND, Circuit' Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
A majority of this court are of opinion that this judgment should be affirmed, with costs; and it is so ordered.