1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 11 F.2d
  5. 11 F.2d 715 (1926)
 

WULFSOHN v. RUSSO-ASIATIC BANK

No. 4343.

11 F.2d 715 (1926)

WULFSOHN et al. v. RUSSO-ASIATIC BANK.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Rehearing Denied April 30, 1926.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Frank E. Hinckley, of San Francisco, Cal., Max Radin, of Berkeley, Cal., and Richard T. Evans, of Tientsin, China (Otto C. Sommerich and Edwin M. Borchard, both of New York, of counsel), for plaintiffs in error.

Chickering & Gregory, of San Francisco, Cal., for defendant in error.

Before HUNT, RUDKIN, and McCAMANT, Circuit Judges.

RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.

This is a writ of error to review a judgment of the United States Court for China. The case was heard on an amended petition, answer, and reply. The amended petition alleges, in substance, that the plaintiff is a banking corporation organized under the laws of Russia, with offices in Shanghai, Harbin, and other places in China and elsewhere; that the defendants are copartners having a place of business in New York City, and maintaining an agent...

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