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.
BROWN-KERR, Inc., Appellee, v. THE Steam Tug P. R. R. NO. 32, Her Engines, etc., the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant, New Jersey Dry Dock & Transportation Company, Appellee, 1931 — 47 F.2d 1082 · caselaw · US
General
BROWN-KERR, Inc., Appellee, v. THE Steam Tug P. R. R. NO. 32, Her Engines, etc., the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant, New Jersey Dry Dock & Transportation Company, Appellee
47 F.2d 1082·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1931
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
BROWN-KERR, Inc., Appellee, v. THE Steam Tug P. R. R. NO. 32, Her Engines, etc., the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant, New Jersey Dry Dock & Transportation Company, Appellee.
No. 187.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 2, 1931.
Burlingham, Yeeder, Fearey, Clark & Hupper, of New York City (Chauneey I. Clark and P. Pearson Shortridge, both of New York City, of' counsel), for appellant.
William F. Purdy and John E. Purdy, both of New York City, for appellee.
Before L. HAND, CHASE, and MACK, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree affirmed.