195 F.2d 104 - Henley v. Elliott — 195 F.2d 104

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 2002

17 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Jack Steinman, New York City, for appellant Mulligan and others.

¶2Thacker, Proffitt, Prizer & Crawley, New York City, for claimants Henley, Green, Figgins, Eaton, Elmore, Torres, Prats and Sullivan, appellants; John C. Crawley and John S. Lockman, New York City advocates.

¶3Jacob Rassner, New York City, and Norman Lustig, Brooklyn, N. Y., for elaimants-appellants Francis J. Mulligan, Public Administrator, and others.

¶4Simone N. Gazan, New York City, for claimant-appellant Louis Pierre, administrator.

¶5Alexander T. Wells, New York City, for appellee, Elliott.

¶6William S. O’Connor, New York City, for appellee, Gehlert.

¶7Elizabeth Robinson, New York City, for appellee, Kjoss.

¶8Monica & Feury, New York City, for appellee, Emcken.

¶9Duer, Strong & Whitehead, New York City, for appellee, Stoltenberg; Walter B. Hall, Elizabeth Robinson and Joseph P. Feury, all of New York City, advocates.

¶10Before AUGUSTUS N. HAND, CHASE and FRANK, Circuit Judges.

¶11PER CURIAM.

¶12The decree is affirmed on opinion of Irving R. Kaufman, J. The motion to dismiss the appeals of claimants Pierre, Mulligan, Derich and Gerhartt is granted because of gross neglect to perfect their appeals.