Legal Opinion

Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 3, 1935No. M-395Published

1Opinion of the Court

LITTLETON, Judge.

In a motion for a new trial the defendant requests amendment of the findings and assigns as errors of law the same propositions that have several times heretofore been considered by this court and other courts to which the questions have been presented. Hills v. United States, 50 F.(2d) 302, 55 F.(2d) 1001, 73 Ct. Cl. 128; Id., 8 F. Supp. 849, 80 Ct. Cl. -; Union Trust Co. of Rochester v. United States (D. C.) 5 F. Supp. 259, affirmed (C. C. A.) 70 F.(2d) 629; Clarke v. United States (D. C.) 5 F. Supp. 292, affirmed (C. C. A.) 69 F.(2d) 748; certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 564,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. San Joaquin Light & Power Corporation v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
  2. Hills v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931
  3. Hills v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1932
  4. Union Trust Co. of Rochester v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
  5. United States v. ClarkeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1934

4 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