Legal Opinion
Bergdoll v. Harrigan
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 26, 1915No. 751PublishedCited by 1 opinion
In error to the United States Circuit Cotut of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
1Per curiam
Judgment affirmed with costs, upon the authority of rule 6, clause 5; Micas v. Williams, 104 U. S. 556; The Alaska, 130 U. S. 201; Chanute City v. Trader, 132 U. S. 210, 214; Northern *610Pacific Railroad v. Amato, 144 U. S. 465, 473, and cause remanded to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Joseph Gilfillan and Mr. George S. Graham for the plaintiff in error. Mr. Joseph W. Catharine for the defendant in error.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. AmatoSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Chanute City v. TraderSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Micas v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
3Cited by1 opinion
- Harrigan v. BergdollCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1916