Legal Opinion

Hudepohl Brewing Co. v. Bannister

District Court, W.D. South Carolina

Decided May 20, 1942No. C. A. 315PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WYCHE, District Judge.

The matter before me in this controversy is the motion of the defendant to dismiss the action upon the ground that the complaint does not state a claim upon - which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b), Civil Rules of Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

The allegations of the complaint pertinent to this motion, are, as follows:

“2. That * * * C. F. Gibson, T. A. Moore, Jr., and W. R. Bannister, the latter being the son of the defendant, * * * caused to be organized * * * a corpo ration known as Colonial Distributing Co., Inc., * * *
“3. That during the month of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Davis v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Davis Sewing MacHine Co. v. RichardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  3. Bell v. BruenSupreme Court of the United States · 1843
  4. McGee v. F. W. Poe Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1935
  5. J. L. Mott Iron Works v. ClarkSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Crafton v. BrownCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2001
  2. Wright v. SumruldNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Hudepohl Brewing Co. v. BannisterDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API