Contracts · MBE-tested
THE WALTER B. POLLOCK
275 F. 1023·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1921
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
THE WALTER B. POLLOCK.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 1, 1921.)
No. 234.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York. Libel by the Bouker Contracting Company against the steam tug Walter B. Pollock, her engines, etc., the Egerton Towing Company, claimant, and others. Deeree for libelant, and claimant appeals.
Affirmed.
Harrington, Bigham & Englar, of New York City (Vine H. Smith, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Foley & Martin, of New York City (William J. Martin and George V. A. McCloskey, both of New York City, of counsel), for libelant appellee.
Macklin. Brown, Purdy & Van Wyck. of New York City (Pierre M. Brown, of New York City, of counsel), for respondents appellees.
Before WARD, ROGERS, and MANTON, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This case involves pure questions of fact and examination of the record discloses nothing that would justify us in disturbing Judge Ohatlield’s findings. The decree is affirmed.