Legal Opinion
Langsenkamp v. Broscalsa Chemical Co.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided July 27, 1927No. 332PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOUGH, District Judge.
The plaintiff William Langsenkamp, who since the filing ■ of the complaint died, and whose legal representative has been substituted as a party plaintiff, and Ida Langsenkamp, who was the wife of the deceased, were residents of the state of Indiana, and brought the suit for the purpose of setting aside and declaring void the sale of bonds of the defendant Brosealsa Chemical Company, in the amount of $54,000.
The defendant Brosealsa Chemical Company is a foreign corporation, with its principal place of business in this district, and is a manufacturing company. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Scudder v. Union National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Lalone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Chattanooga National Building & Loan Ass'n v. DensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- United States v. Mammoth Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1926
- Munday v. Wisconsin Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ingram-Day Lumber Co. v. SchultzCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1930
- (PC) Fregia v. MirandaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
- (PC) Hendrix v. GomezDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- (PS) Brick v. Cretchen-McCoyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- (PS) Engel v. Cantil-SakauyeDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.