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.
HOYLAND-LEMLE COMPANY et al. v. Charles F. THOMPSON, 1934 — 68 F.2d 1005 · caselaw · US
General
HOYLAND-LEMLE COMPANY et al. v. Charles F. THOMPSON
68 F.2d 1005·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh 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
HOYLAND-LEMLE COMPANY et al. v. Charles F. THOMPSON.
No. 5129.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Feb. 6, 1934.
Samuel W. Banning, of Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Walter F. Boye, of Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Before ALSCHULEE, EVANS, and FITZIIENEY, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
On motion of appellants pursuant to stipulation, it is hereby ordered that the appeal heretofore taken on or about December 7, 1933, be, and the same is hereby, dismissed without prejudice to appellants’ rights to an appeal after accounting and final decree.