Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

227 F.2d 523

Docket Nos. 5126, 5127.

Shotkin v. Black

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • Bernard M. SHOTKINv.William A. BLACK, Dr. Charles A. Rymer, Dr. Clark A. Barnacle, General Electric Company, Henry Tull (Henry W. Toll), Appellees. Bernard M. SHOTKIN, also known as Barney M
  • Shotkin, individually and as trustee for Bruce Shotkin, Beth Shotkin and Nona Shotkin, doing business under the trade name and styles Edison Power and Light Company and Dison Power and Light Companyv.GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals

Sept. 12, 1955. Rehearing Denied Oct. 10, 1955.

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1955-09-12

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1955

1 federal appellate ·

5 counsel of record

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1955-09-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bernard M. Shotkin filed a brief, pro se.

Omer Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., of Colorado (Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., of Colorado, and Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Atty. Gen., of Colorado, were with him on the brief), for William A. Black, Dr. Charles A. Rymer and Dr. Clark A. Barnacle.

Grant, Shafroth & Toll, Henry W. Toll, and John F. Shafroth, Denver, Colo., filed a brief for General Electric Company.

Ora H. George, Denver, Colo., filed a brief for Henry Tull.

G. M. Westa, Denver, Colo. (John R. Turnquist and Luis D. Rovira, Denver, Colo., were with him on the brief), for Thomas A. Edison, Inc.

Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and BRATTON and HUXMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

This is an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado dismissing appellant's cause of action in the two above-entitled cases for failure to prosecute the same in the trial court. An examination of the record compels the conclusion that the trial court was amply warranted in entering the order appealed from.

¶2

Affirmed.

/227/f2d/523 · .json · Public domain