ELLIOTT ADDRESSING MACH. CO. v. ADDRESSING TYPEWRITER STENCIL CORPORATION

No. 291.

31 F.2d 282 (1929)

ELLIOTT ADDRESSING MACH. CO. et al. v. ADDRESSING TYPEWRITER STENCIL CORPORATION et al.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 4, 1929.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

James R. Bowen, of Jersey City, N. J., for appellants.

B. W. B. Brown, of New York City, and F. Allan Minne and William Nevarre Cromwell, both of Chicago, Ill., for appellees.

Before L. HAND and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.


PER CURIAM.

The order was drawn in entire disregard of equity rule 71, which forbids any recital, except that which comes to us from the English rules of 1824. Instead of this, the solicitor filled up nearly four printed pages with mention of the affidavits used on the motion, and a page and a half more with what he chose to call "findings" — an especial barbarism in an order pendente lite.

Of the three provisions, we think that the first should stand...

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