1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 7 F.2d
  5. 7 F.2d 266 (1925)
 

BURDEN v. ROBERTSON

Nos. 213, 214.

7 F.2d 266 (1925)

BURDEN et al. v. ROBERTSON. SAME v. THOMPSON.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 16, 1925.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Chase Mellen, of New York City, for plaintiffs in error Burden and Putnam.

Jay & Candler, of New York City (Robert W. Candler, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff in error Tobin.

Greene & Hurd, of New York City (Daniel S. Murphy and Emerson F. Davis, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs in error Jester and Navarro Securities Co.

Satterlee & Canfield, of New York City (S. H. Hammond and R. Randolph Hicks, both of New York City, of counsel), for defendants in error Robertson and Thompson.

Before ROGERS, HOUGH, and MANTON, Circuit Judges.

HOUGH, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).

The problem at bar is one of sufficiency of proof. The plaintiffs have satisfied a jury that they did about $15,000 worth of work for somebody at the instance and request of Marvin; of course each of them declared upon the "joint and several instance and request" of these plaintiffs in error and others. But the record yields not a scintilla of evidence that either of the plaintiffs knew any one else concerned...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases