From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arvidson v. Reynolds Metals Company

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 17, 1956
236 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1956)

Opinion

No. 14734.

August 17, 1956.

Schafer, Cronan Nelson, James P. Cronan, Jr., Portland, Ore., Paul M. Reeder, Hillsboro, Ore., Eisenhower, Hunter, Ramsdell Duncan, Tacoma, Wash., for appellants.

King, Miller, Anderson, Nash Yerke, Frederic A. Yerke, Jr., Portland, Ore., Henderson, Carnahan, Thompson Gordon, Tacoma, Wash., Walter L. Rice, W. Tobin Lennon, Richmond, Virginia, for appellee.

Before BONE and ORR, Circuit Judges, and MURPHY, District Judge.


The above cases coming on to be heard upon the record, the briefs of the parties, and the argument of counsel in open court, and it appearing that the findings of fact of the district court were not clearly erroneous, and that the judgments are sustained by substantial evidence, and that the conclusions of law of the district court were correctly drawn,

The judgment is affirmed, upon the opinion of the district court in W.D. Wash. 1954, 125 F. Supp. 481.


Summaries of

Arvidson v. Reynolds Metals Company

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 17, 1956
236 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1956)
Case details for

Arvidson v. Reynolds Metals Company

Case Details

Full title:Albert A. ARVIDSON et al., Appellants, v. REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY, a…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 17, 1956

Citations

236 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1956)

Citing Cases

Stockdale v. Agrico Chemical Co., Division of Continental Oil Co.

A nuisance which is subject to abatement is not permanent. Vogt v. City of Grinnell, 123 Iowa 332, 98 N.W.…

Freeman v. Grain Processing Corp.

Perhaps the most cited, relatively recent, trespass cases in the air pollution context arise from fluoride…