Legal Opinion
Kincaid v. City of Anchorage
District Court, D. Alaska
Decided May 11, 1951No. A-6820PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DIMOND, District Judge.
This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover the sum of $68,573.22 for construction work claimed -to have been performed by the plaintiffs for the defendant.
The defendant has filed Motion to Dismiss, reading as follows: “Comes now the above named defendant and moves the court to dismiss the action on the ground that such action is not being prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. For reason, defendant states that R. G. Kincaid and Hugh M. King, plaintiffs in this action, acting in behalf of Kincaid and King Construction Company, did assign to A. W.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State of Washington v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Bowles v. Glick Bros. Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1945
- Glick Bros. Lumber Co. v. BowlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Flynn v. BrooksCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Ducker v. ButlerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- York Blouse Corp. v. Kaplowitz Bros.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1953
- Kincaid v. City of AnchorageDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1951