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.
LEKTOPHONE CORPORATION v. CROSLEY RADIO CORPORATION, 1931 — 48 F.2d 1077 · caselaw · US
Corporations
LEKTOPHONE CORPORATION v. CROSLEY RADIO CORPORATION
48 F.2d 1077·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
LEKTOPHONE CORPORATION v. CROSLEY RADIO CORPORATION.
No. 5262.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Jan. 9, 1931.
For opinion below, see 46 F.(2d) 126.
Pennie, Davis, Marvin & Edmonds, of New York City, Murray & Zugelter, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Hoguet & Neary, of New York City, for appellant.
Allen & Allen, of Cincinnati, Ohio, Thos. G. Haight, of Jersey City, N. J., and Giles W. Rich, of New York City, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree of District Court affirmed upon authority of Lektophone v. Rola Company and Miller Bros. Co. v. Lektophone, 282 U. S. 168, 51 S. Ct. 93, 75 L. Ed.-, decided by Supreme Court on December 8, 1930.