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.
SAM ROSENBAUM & SONS COMPANY, Doing Business as the Kalamazoo Pant Company, Appellant, v. G. E. PRENTICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellee, 1934 — 73 F.2d 1012 · caselaw · US
General
SAM ROSENBAUM & SONS COMPANY, Doing Business as the Kalamazoo Pant Company, Appellant, v. G. E. PRENTICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellee
73 F.2d 1012·United States Court of Appeals for the Second 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
SAM ROSENBAUM & SONS COMPANY, Doing Business as the Kalamazoo Pant Company, Appellant, v. G. E. PRENTICE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 16.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Oct. 15, 1934.
Watrous, Hewitt, Gumbart & Corbin, of New Haven, Conn., and Chappell & Earl, of Kalamazoo, Mich., for appellant.
Robert Cushman, of Boston, Mass., for appellee.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and SWAN, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree affirmed.