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
Clark Marine Corporation, Appellant, v. Cargill, Inc., et al., Appellees
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. - 345 F.2d 79
May 7, 1965
Thomas H. Benton, John L. Avant, Benton & Moseley, Dodd, Hirsch, Barker, Avant & Wall, Baton Rouge, La., for appellant.
Robert L. Stern, E. C. Heininger, Chicago, Ill., Laurence W. Brooks, Charles W. Phillips, Taylor, Porter, Brooks, Fuller & Phillips, Baton Rouge, La., Thomas B. McNeill, Mayer, Friedlich, Spiess, Tierney, Brown & Platt, Chicago, Ill., for appellees.
Before JONES and WISDOM, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
The facts from which this appeal arose and the basis for the district court's decision are fully developed in its opinion. Clark Marine Corporation v. Cargill, Inc., 226 F.Supp. 103. After notice of appeal was filed, the deposition of a witness was taken. A motion to quash the deposition was denied with a reservation referring to the panel hearing the case on the merits the question as to what effect, if any, should be given to the deposition. We conclude that the deposition should not be considered, but we are also of the opinion that a consideration of it would not in any way affect the disposition of the appeal. We find ourselves in agreement with the district court and its judgment is
Affirmed.