Legal Opinion

Cmax, Inc. v. Hall

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 30, 1961No. 17227_1PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

290 F.2d 736

Petition of CMAX, INC., for a Writ of Mandamus, Petitioner,

v.

Honorable Peirson M. HALL, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Central Division, Respondent.

No. 17227.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

March 30, 1961.

Phil Jacobson and H. J. Bischoff, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.

Hill, Farrer & Burrill, Los Angeles, Cal., for Petersen Engraving Co.

Before POPE, HAMLIN and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges.

POPE, Circuit Judge.

1

In this proceeding petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondent Judge to vacate an order…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. La Buy v. Howes Leather Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Parr v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  4. Julius Nagler v. Admiral CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
  5. Vecchia v. Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Neveu v. City of FresnoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2005
  2. United States v. Anchor Line, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1964
  3. Strawn v. SokoloffDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API