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.
SHAWKEE MFG. CO. et al., v. HARTFORD-EMPIRE CO., 1934 — 73 F.2d 1013 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
SHAWKEE MFG. CO. et al., v. HARTFORD-EMPIRE CO.
73 F.2d 1013·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1934
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
SHAWKEE MFG. CO. et al., v. HARTFORD-EMPIRE CO.
No. 5203.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
July 3, 1934.
See, also, 68 F.(2d) 726, and 292 U S. 640, 54 S. Ct. 773, 78 L. Ed. 1492.
Wm. B. Jaspert, of Pittsburgh, Pa., Otto R. Barnett, of Chicago, 111., and Jo. Bailey Brown, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellants.
Thomas G. Haight, of Jersey City, N. J., and Byrnes, Stebbins & Blenko, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee.
Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — DAVIS, Circuit Judge.]
DAVIS, Circuit Judge.
After due consideration, it is ordered that the petition of defendants-appellants for leave to file a bill of review be, and the same is hereby, denied.