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
James A. KAMMERDINER, Appellant, v. S. R. BOWEN COMPANY and Jack F. Stephan, Appellees
68 F.2d 1007·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1934
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
James A. KAMMERDINER, Appellant, v. S. R. BOWEN COMPANY and Jack F. Stephan, Appellees.
No. 7319.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Jan. 29, 1934.
Hamer H. Jamieson of Los Angeles, Cal., Chas. E Townsend, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
J. Calvin Brown, of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee Bowen Co.
Ford W. Harris and Harris, Whann & Foster, all of Los Angeles Cal., for appellee Stephan.
Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and GARKECHT, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon stipulation of counsel for respective parties, ordered appeal (3 F. Supp. 986) dismissed, without costs; mandate forthwith.