General
LAURIDSEN et al. v. ALEXANDER et al.
16 F.2d 432·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1926
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
LAURIDSEN et al. v. ALEXANDER et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
December 20, 1926.)
No. 4744.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Western District of Washington; Edward E. Cushman, Judge.
Action by Solomon Lauridsen and Henry Kamps against Louis H. Alexander and Jane Doe Alexander. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
F. C. Reagan and Edwin H. Fbck, both of Seattle, Wash., for appellants.
Wesley Lloyd, of Tacoma, Wash., and Geox'ge Dysart and C. D. Cunningham, both of Centraba, Wash., for appebees.
Before RUDKIN, Circuit Judge, and DIETRICH and KERRIGAN, District Judges.
Rehearing denied February 14, 1927.
[MAJORITY — DIETRICH, District Judge.]
DIETRICH, District Judge.
In its legal aspect this case is identical with No. 4742, Katie Roberts Wilson v. Margaret Jane Robinson et al., 16 F.(2d) 431, this day decided, and for the reasons assigned in that case the decree is affirmed, as there modified.
RUDKIN, Circuit Judge, dissents, for the reason stated in Wilson v. Robinson, supra.