Legal Opinion
Cmax, Inc. v. Hall
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 19, 1962No. 17517PublishedCited by 223 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
300 F.2d 265
Petition of CMAX, INC., For a Writ of Mandamus, Peitioner,
v.
Honorable Peirson M. HALL, Chief Judge of the United States
District Court for the Southern District of
California, Central Division, Respondent.
No. 17517.
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.
March 19, 1962.
Phil Jacobson, H. J. Bischoff, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Dunlap, Holmes, Ross & Woodson, John W. Holmes, Pasadena, Cal., for respondent Drewry Photocolor Corp., real party in interest.
Before BARNES, HAMLEY and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.
HAMLEY, Circuit Judge.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- La Buy v. Howes Leather Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Cmax, Inc. v. HallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Central Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by223 opinions
- Hoptowit v. RayCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Coursen v. A.H. Robins Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Ernest Bock, LLC v. Paul SteelmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2023
- Public Employees Retirement Ass'n of New Mexico v. Anthony Earley, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
218 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.