Legal Opinion
Prentiss v. Chandler
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 23, 1936No. Nos. 8031, 8032PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GARRECHT, Circuit Judge.
We are here'concerned with an appeal from a judgment dismissing an action instituted by H. F. Schilling (predecessor of William Prentiss, Jr.), as receiver of the United States National Bank of Los Angeles, against the appellee Harry Chandler in case No. 8031 and also a similar appeal in case No. 8032 in an action brought by the same receiver against the Times-Mirror Company.
The complaints were filed on the same day. The tases were not consolidated, but were set down on the same day for trial in the court below. By stipulations made during the trial and at the close of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kullman & Co. v. WoolleyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1936
- Nelson v. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Collins v. School Dist. of Borough of TraffordCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1934
- Rucker v. KokrdaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
- Mechanics Universal Joint Co. v. CulhaneCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1935
3Cited by2 opinions
- Michelsen v. PenneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Michelsen v. PenneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943