Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

229 F. 1021

Docket No. 2058.

Federal Cement Co. v. Shaffer

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided February 17, 1916.)

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1916-02-17

<p>In Error to tile District Court of the United States for the Eastern. District of Pennsylvania; Oliver B. Dickinson, Judge.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1916

1 district ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Shaffer v. Federal Cement Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1916-02-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1In Error to tile District Court of the United States for the Eastern. District of Pennsylvania; Oliver B. Dickinson, Judge.

¶2Horace Stern and William. Jay Turner, both of Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff in error.

¶3Calvin F. Smith and Smith, Puff & Lattb, all of Easton, Pa., for defendant in error.

¶4Before BUFFINGTON, McPHEUSON, and WOOL-LEY, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6The defendant in this case, the Federal Cement Company, having filed a bill in equity in the District Court to No. 1407, September term, 1915, in which this controversy can ho more satisfactorily heard and determined, and having offered to pay into the District Court the money Involved in this suit, it seems to us that the best way to meet the difficulties presented on this writ of error is to assent to the company’s offer, and to reverse the judgment formally, but without expressing an opinion on the legal questions discussed below. 225 Fed. 893. It is therefore ordered that if the Cement Company, on or before the 4th day of March, 1916, pay into the District Court-in the equity proceeding referred to above the amount of coupon interest sued for in this action, with interest thereon, the clerk of this court is directed to enter an order reversing the judgment.

/229/f1d/1021 · .json · Public domain