Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

194 F.2d 532

Docket Nos. 11388, 11389.

Clay v. Sinclair Refining Co.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Jan. 21, 1952.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1952-01-21

2 counsel of record

Relies on Sinclair Refining Co. v. Clay

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1952-01-21

¶1Carpenter & Carpenter, Tiffin, Ohio, for Ada M. Clay.

¶2Hubert B. Fuller, Cleveland, Ohio, Eugene M. Hines, Chicago, Ill., for Sinclair Refining Co.

¶3Before HICKS, Chief Judge, and ALLEN and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This appeal and cross-appeal were heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and upon consideration thereof the Court is of the opinion that there is no reversible error upon the record.

¶6It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the judgment appealed from be and the same is in all things affirmed upon the grounds and for the reasons set forth in the memorandum Opinion of the District Judge filed January 4, 1951, 102 F.Supp. 732 and the findings of fact and conclusions of law filed January 16, 1951.

/194/f2d/532 · .json · Public domain