Legal Opinion
Dickerson v. Continental Oil Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided April 6, 1973No. 72-2479PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
The narrow question is whether on remand following an earlier appeal, Dickerson v. Continental Oil Company, 5 Cir., 1971, 449 F.2d 1209, the trial court could now declare that interest should be allowed on the amounts admittedly due the Intervenor compensation carrier under the Longshoremen’s Act. How this came about and how the trial court answered it is set out in Judge Hunter’s opinion in the Appendix.
We get to the same result but by a different route.
It is perfectly plain that without characterizing the omission of interest from the judgment1 as a “clerical mistake” or *636otherwise, the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Transit Casualty Company, Etc. v. Security Trust Company, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- West Virginia Oil & Gas Co., Inc. v. George E. Breece Lumber Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1954
- Rhodes v. HoustonDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 1966
- Meredith v. FairCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Rogers v. Consolidated Rock Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Home Life Insurance Company, New York, Cross-Appellant v. Equitable Equipment Company, Inc., Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
- National Surety Corp. v. Charles Carter & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Allen v. JacobsonDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1979
- National Surety Corporation, Cross-Appellee v. Charles Carter & Company, Inc., Defendant-Third Party Cross-Appellant v. Maryland Casualty Co., Third Party Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Dickerson v. Continental Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973