Ruby Lee Minar, Inc. v. Hammett
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HITZ, Associate Justice.
This is a cross-appeal taken by the defendants below in Hammett v. Minar et al., 60 App. D. C. 286, 53 F.(2d) 144, just decided.
The only question presented for decision is based upon the allowance of costs to the plaintiff while dismissing her bill of complaint, which question was presented by brief and argument at the bar.
-d . ,, ,, o , . .. But the allowance of costs m equity is ,, , , a matter of discretion with the court, not usually reviewa.ble on appeal, and the court below twice considered the question of these costs, and twice came to the same eonclusion…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hammett v. Ruby Lee Minar, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1931
3Cited by6 opinions
- Harris v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Goozh v. Capitol Souvenir Co., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Scholla v. Scholla (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1953
- Shima v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- Duplate Corp. v. Triplex Safety Glass Co. of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.