Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
William H. BANKS WAREHOUSES, Inc., a corporation, and JohnAlfred Halford, Appellants,v.George L. WATT et al., Appellees
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. - 196 F.2d 1018
May 15, 1952.Rehearing Denied June 19, 1952
J. L. Eberle, T. H. Eberle and W. D. Eberle, all of Boise, Idaho, L. Duncan Lloyd, Wm. H. Hillier, Chicago, Ill. (Richards, Haga & Eberle, Boise, Idaho, Lord, Bissell & Kadyk, Chicago, Ill., of counsel), for appellants.
Ray D. Agee, Frank L. Stephan, Beckwith & Langley and Parry, Keenan, Robertson & Daly, all of Twin Falls, Idaho, for appellees.
William R. Wallace, Jr., Maynard Garrison, William R. Ray and John R. Pascoe, all of San Francisco, Cal., amici curiae.
Before MATHEWS, HEALY and BONE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from a judgment in two consolidated actions- an action by William H. Banks Warehouses, Inc., and John Alfred Halford against W. Andrew Jean and others and an action by George L. Watt and others against William H. Banks Warehouses, Inc., and Underwriters at Lloyd's (London). On the grounds and for the reasons stated in the District Court's opinion, 96 F.Supp. 731, the judgment is affirmed.