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.
Thomas H. TRACY et al. v. LANDOVER HOLDING CO. et al., 1931 — 51 F.2d 1085 · caselaw · US
General
Thomas H. TRACY et al. v. LANDOVER HOLDING CO. et al.
51 F.2d 1085·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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
Thomas H. TRACY et al. v. LANDOVER HOLDING CO. et al.
No. 5317.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
June 30, 1931.
Tracy, Chapman & Welles, of Toledo, Ohio, for appellants.
Cotton, Franklin, Wright & Gordon, of New York City, for appellees.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Agreed order of settlemént. entered pursuant to stipulation of counsel.