Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

John W. Piland v. Maryland Casualty Company

179 F.2d 678

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1950-02-08
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. A careful study of the record and briefs in this case convinces us that the judgment of the Court below was correct and should be affirmed. In view of the full, clear and convincing opinion of the trial Judge, 1 we see no occasion for the writing of an extended opinion. The judgment of the Court below is Affirmed. 1 . D.C., 85 F.Supp. 31.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed John W. Piland v. Maryland Casualty Company. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
2 opinions
PILAND v. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY,179 F.2d 678(5th Cir. 1950)
John W. PILAND, Appellant, v. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 12942.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 8, 1950.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District ofPage 679Louisiana; Herbert W. Christenberry, Judge.
Stanley E. Loeb, New Orleans, La., Gordon Boswell, New Orleans, La., for appellant.

Alfred C. Kammer, New Orleans, La., for appellee.
Before WALLER, BORAH, and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
A careful study of the record and briefs in this case convinces us that the judgment of the Court below was correct and should be affirmed. In view of the full, clear and convincing opinion of the trial Judge,1we see no occasion for the writing of an extended opinion. The judgment of the Court below is

Affirmed.
  1. D.C.,85 F. Supp. 31. ↩