Legal Opinion

Paul Martin and Verla Martin v. Reynolds Metals Company

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided October 26, 1964No. 19219_1PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

This is an appeal from an interlocutory injunction, now in effect, obtained by Reynolds Metals Company against Paul Martin and Yerla Martin, his wife, requiring them to remove a sign, containing false and defamatory statements, located upon their property, which sign is damaging to the company’s business. 1

Appellant’s opening brief does not contain a specification of errors, as required by our Rule 18, subd. 2(d). 2 Nevertheless, one of appellant’s attorneys signed a certificate attached to the opening brief, as required by our Rule 18, subd. 2(g), certifying that in connection with the…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Dino DeLaurentiis Cinemato-Grafica, S.P.A. v. D-150, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
  2. Bruce Dickerson Stevens v. Security Pacific National Bank, Bruce Dickerson Stevens v. Kindel & AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
  3. David Mitchel v. General Electric Company, Joe MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  4. Kaiser Trading Co. v. Associated Metals & Minerals Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 1970
  5. Bunch v. Artec International Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1983

2 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