Legal Opinion
Holman v. Campbell
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 1, 1930PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThacher, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
The attempted revival of the permit of February 20,1922, must, of course, fail. The only evidence of' its existence is its production from the files of the Administrator with its surrender indorsed upon the face thereof. Furthermore, plaintiff acted under the permit of March 25, 1926, until the permit of December 31, 1928, issued. His acceptance of the former permit and his applications to .amend its terms leave no room for the contention that either of the prior permits was still outstanding. Doran v. Bay State Dist. Corp. (C. C. A. 1st Cir.) 36 F.(2d) 657,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ma-King Products Co. v. BlairSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lion Laboratories, Inc. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- American Denaturing Corp. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Doran v. Bay State Distributing Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1929
3Cited by4 opinions
- Unger v. CampbellDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1930
- Bender v. CampbellDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1930
- Daub v. CampbellDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1930
- Daub v. MossDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1931