Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lawrence Warehouse Co. v. Defense Supplies Corp.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 6, 1948No. 11418Published

1DissentHealy, Circuit Judge

The majority it seems to me have reached an unconscionable result on the basis of insubstantial and purely technical considerations. The statute does not justify, much less compel, the result. It has been arrived at by treating as an insuperable jurisdictional obstacle what ought, at most, be regarded as a procedural omission of no substantial prejudice to any party.

The pending controversy was initiated by motion of appellants Lawrence Warehouse Company and Capitol Chevrolet to vacate our affirmance of the judgment against them, Lawrence Warehouse Co. et al. v. Defense Supplies Corp., 9 Cir.,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Anderson v. YungkauSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Forty-One Thirty-Six Wilcox Bldg. Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  4. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  5. Fleming v. GoodwinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API