1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 230 F.2d
  5. 230 F.2d 175 (1956)
 

HICKEY v. SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY

No. 11721.

230 F.2d 175 (1956)

Michael J. HICKEY, Appellant, v. SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Decided February 15, 1956.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Abraham E. Freedman, Philadelphia, Pa. (Wilfred R. Lorry, Freedman, Landy & Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Thomas E. Byrne, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa. (Springer H. Moore, Jr., Krusen, Evans & Shaw, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, McLAUGHLIN and KALODNER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decision by the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denying the appellant recovery for maintenance and cure. We do not take issue with the legal points which the appellant has raised. On his behalf his counsel has filed a learned brief setting out the law pertaining to maintenance and cure. But the judgment of the district court is to be affirmed because of specific findings

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