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.
Chas. J. CONNOR et al., as Thos. Connor & Sons, Appellants, v. EXCESS INS. CO. OF AMERICA, Appellee, 1932 — 54 F.2d 1077 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Chas. J. CONNOR et al., as Thos. Connor & Sons, Appellants, v. EXCESS INS. CO. OF AMERICA, Appellee
54 F.2d 1077·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1932
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
Chas. J. CONNOR et al., as Thos. Connor & Sons, Appellants, v. EXCESS INS. CO. OF AMERICA, Appellee.
No. 4455.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Jan. 6, 1932.
John A. Hártpenee, of Jersey City, N. J., for appellants.
Walter Gordon Merritt, of New York City, for appellee.
Before BUFFINGTON and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges, and THOMSON, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of the annexed stipulation of the parties, dated January 6, 1932, it is now ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the order and judgment of reversal herein, dated August 13, 1931, 51 F.(2d) 626, and the mandate issued thereon, be vacated and set aside, and the appeal dismissed without prejudice to further proceedings in the District Court.
This order is now entered by consent of all parties. In point of fact no question has ever been raised in this court until this date that the “court had no jurisdiction by reason of the failure of the parties themselves to file a written waiver of jury trial. We make the order now because all parties agree that it be made.