From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mohasco Industries, Inc. v. E.T. Barwick Mills

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Mar 18, 1965
342 F.2d 431 (5th Cir. 1965)

Opinion

No. 20966.

March 18, 1965.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia; Lewis R. Morgan, Judge.

Albert E. Mayer, Atlanta, Ga., Stanton T. Lawrence, Jr., Leslie B. Young, New York City, Pennie, Edmonds, Morton, Taylor Adams, New York City, of counsel, for appellant.

Charles H. Walker, New York City, M. Cook Barwick, Wilson, Branch, Barwick and Vandiver, Atlanta, Ga., Albert E. Fey, Fish, Richardson Neave, New York City, of counsel, for appellees.

Before WISDOM and GEWIN, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, District Judge.


In petition for rehearing appellant takes us to task for use of the words in our opinion that we are in agreement "with the result reached by the trial court," and concludes that we have held by implication that some of the findings of the trial court were clearly erroneous and that we may have disapproved of rules of law applied by the trial court. Such interpretation is incorrect. We consider the opinion of the District Court sufficiently informative, and a correct disposition of the issues presented.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing be, and the same is hereby denied, 5 Cir., 340 F.2d 319, which affirmed D.C., 221 F. Supp. 191.


Summaries of

Mohasco Industries, Inc. v. E.T. Barwick Mills

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Mar 18, 1965
342 F.2d 431 (5th Cir. 1965)
Case details for

Mohasco Industries, Inc. v. E.T. Barwick Mills

Case Details

Full title:MOHASCO INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellant, v. E.T. BARWICK MILLS, INC. and…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Mar 18, 1965

Citations

342 F.2d 431 (5th Cir. 1965)

Citing Cases

Southern Mach. Co. v. Mohasco Industries, Inc.

After delivery of one machine and preparation of the rest of the order, however, Louisa refused to take a use…