Legal Opinion
Kobilkin v. Pillsbury
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 23, 1939No. 9034Published
1Opinion of the Court
103 F.2d 667 (1939)
KOBILKIN
v.
PILLSBURY et al.
No. 9034.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
April 14, 1939.
As Amended on Denial of Rehearing May 23, 1939.
Gladstein, Grossman & Margolis and George Olshausen, all of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Frank J. Hennessy, U. S. Atty., and S. P. Murman, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee Warren H. Pillsbury.
Herman Phleger, Maurice E. Harrison, Howard Finn, Gregory A. Harrison, M. B. Plant, and Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, all of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee Matson Navigation Co.
Before DENMAN, MATHEWS, and HEALY,…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Williams v. Safety Casualty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1937
- Marsh v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Guderian v. Sterling Sugar & Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Cooke v. Holland Furnace Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1918
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.