The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (in case citations, 1st Cir.) is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:
More16 F.2d 427 (1926), ESSEX NAT., The evidence establishes the following facts:, The bankrupt, Atwood Gardner, Inc., was a small shoe-manufacturing concern doing business in Haverhill, Mass. It was adjudicated a bankrupt on November 24, on an involuntary petition filed November 10, 1924.
LEUNG FOOK YUNG. The applicants, their alleged brother, and an alleged uncle But in all those cases the villages have been small, so that, as noted above, the courts could not say that reasonable minds could not have reached the conclusion that the discrepancies disclosed a made-up case.
that he thereupon applied for a search warrant to search the building, which was issued upon an affidavit filed by him stating the above facts, and upon this warrant 18 These are separate offenses, and a judgment of guilty was properly entered under each count and a penalty imposed.
, The errors assigned are that the court erred in refusing to direct a verdict of not guilty, and in refusing to instruct the jury that, if the liquor was possessed by Schlieff and Hunt on the boat, and Brown had no part in the illegal possession, the jury should acquit him; Stat. Ann.
TARANTINO., In the Immigration Act Congress provided in express terms that a nonquota immigrant seeking admission to the United States must have an immigration visa or a permit to re-enter the United States regularly issued in accordance with the regulations of the superintendent of immigration.
The District Court held the three libelants and interveners, the Standard Oil Company, the McCormack Stevedoring Company, Inc., and the Robins Dry Dock Repair Company, to be entitled to maritime liens on the freight moneys;, The American rule as to freights is derived from the English rule
That the federal officers had no warrant authorizing them to make a seizure is immaterial, as the seizure had already been made by the police officer, and the liquor and articles seized were turned over to the federal officers, and the liquors seized were properly received in evidence. C. A. 641;
, ANDERSON, Circuit Judge. citing Potter v. National Bank, 102 U.S. 163, 26 L. Ed. 111; Taney, C. J., saying:, The rules of evidence prescribed by the statute of a state are always followed by the courts of the United States, when sitting in the state, in commercial cases as well as in others.
, *735 Van Vechten Veeder, of New York City (Charles Hartzell, Daniel F. Kelley, and Hartzell, Kelley Hartzell, all of San Juan, Porto Rico, on the brief), for plaintiff in error. and that she has suffered greatly by reason of such calumny, causing damage to her in the sum of $25, 000.
C. A. 367. that the liquor was contraband and also subject to seizure; Boarding Vessels. 574, 65 L. Ed. 1048, 13 A. L. R. 1159, the private papers of the defendant that were admitted in evidence against him had been stolen, and delivered by the thief to the law officer of the United States;
280, 69 L. Ed. 543, 39 A. L. R. 790., The Court. The fifth assignment relates to the extent of the cross-examination of Santiago, who took the stand in his own behalf and testified to the effect that he had no association with Segurola, except to ask him to take him in his car over to San Juan;
Parker Pen Co. v. Rex Mfg. C. A. 176; for, whether Belcher had operated his business under the one-half interest in the Peterson patent, which the Leman assignment purported to transfer, or under his complete title to the patent, the damages suffered by him would be the damage to his business.
967, 972 (57 L. Ed. 1410), and other cases. There was therefore no evidence properly before the court warranting a finding that the warehouse delivery, tendered promptly after the arrival of the Tuckanuck and the rejection of the cocoa thereon, was too late under the terms of the contract.
And the question reduces itself to this: Whether the United States can maintain an action against the executors to recover the balance of the tax which the statute imposed, the executors having filed a return containing incorrect statements as to material facts, the tax never having been assessed.
The equity jurisdiction of such courts extends to suits by heirs against executors and administrators [citing cases] and to suits against trustees for the recovery of an interest in the trust property by the beneficiary or his assignee. Clark v. Allen, 11 Rawle I. 439, 23 Am. 1, 7 L. Ed. 27;
, (d) Respondents procure from dealers handling said products reports of the failure of other dealers handling same to observe and maintain said resale prices, and reports of sales by dealers to other dealers who fail to maintain said prices. 150, 257 U.S. 441, 66 L. Ed. 307, 19 A. L. R. 882.
9 F.2d 753 (1926), AMERICAN R. CO. OF PORTO RICO, v., SANTIAGO et al., On the question of the right of the father to maintain the action for the death of his minor child section 60 expressly provides that a father, or in case of his death, or desertion of his family, the mother may maintain it.
