Legal Opinion

Navigazione Libera Triestina v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 17, 1929No. 5875PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LOUDERBACK, District Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing plaintiff’s amended complaint. The dismissal is based upon a demurrer interposed by the defendant to the said amended complaint, and sets forth four grounds o-f demurrer. At the hearing before the trial court, the demurrer was ordered overruled as to the first ground and sustained as to the fourth ground, to wit, that the amended complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The second and third grounds were not considered. Plaintiff was allowed a period of seven days to amend its amended…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. Wong Wing v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. StranahanSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  4. United States v. Ju ToySupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  5. The Chinese Exclusion CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1889

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Lloyd Royal Belge Societe Anonyme v. EltingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
  2. British Empire Steam Nav. Co. v. EltingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
  3. Ex Parte KurthDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1939
  4. Fisburn v. JacksonDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1932
  5. Lloyd Sabaudo Societa Anonima Per Azioni v. EltingDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1930

5 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