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:
More426 F.2d at 577., 258, (4) Chris-Craft also is entitled to recover damages from Bangor Punta for the injury caused by Bangor Punta's cash purchases of large blocks of Piper stock during the pendency of Bangor Punta's exchange offer for Piper shares, in violation of Rule 10b-6 under the 1934 Act.
On review the district court affirmed., 27, We conclude accordingly that if the instruments were true leases, the security interest in the leased equipment was not perfected because of the failure of the Bank to file financing statements in New Jersey.8, 28, Were Lease Instruments True Leases
240, 2 L. Ed. 2d 228 (1957); At the hearing before the Special Master, petitioner allegedly was inadequately represented by counsel, in that his counsel failed to secure the presence of the same exculpatory witnesses which his prior counsel also failed to produce at the original trial.
2433, 32 L. Ed. 2d 689 (1972). Upon denial of bail by the district court petitioner appealed to this court, which affirmed the lower court's decision, Glynn v. Donnelly, 470 F.2d 95 (1st Cir. Both application and certificate were directed to what the witness was expected to say.
It is true that we have said that where the denial of a request for a restraining order, taken after a full presentation of both sides, has the effect of the denial of a preliminary injunction, appellate jurisdiction lies, I. T. T. Lamp Division of I. T. T. v. Minter, 435 F.2d 989 (1st Cir.
487 F.2d 338, Mickey and Nell SWINBURN, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, and BobZirby, Lubbock, Texas, Defendants-Appellees., United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. See Tidwell v. Dees, 5 Cir.
491 F.2d 751, Sullivanv.First National Bank of Absecon, New Jersey, 73-1653, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Third Circuit, 12/19/73, 1, D.N.J., AFFIRMED
1361, 31 L. Ed. 2d 636 (1972) by virtue of their use of the area to be affected by the construction of the Chicago Annex; Hanly II, 471 F.2d at 830-831.3, 21, Before applying the suggested tests to the Chicago Annex, it is well to compare it with the Foley Square detention center in some detail.
502 F.2d 1159, 87 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3274, N.L.R.B.v.Ancorp, 73-1345, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 11/8/73, 1, N.L.R.B., ENFORCED
502 F.2d 1159, U. S.v.Roberts, 73-1336, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 11/20/73, 1, D.Me., AFFIRMED
, Bernard Manning, Asst., MEMORANDUM and ORDER, 1, Appellee, serving a state felony sentence, was ordered released by the district court, 365 F. Supp. A short while after the writ had issued, the Attorney General of Massachusetts filed in this court a motion for stay pending appeal.
502 F.2d 1159, Mitchikv.U. S., 73-1325, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 12/5/73, 1, D.N.H., AFFIRMED
487 F.2d 370, UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v.James Edward EDSON, Defendant-Appellant., No. 73-1323., United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit., Argued Oct. 16, 1973.Decided Oct. 23, 1973., Joseph F. Flynn, Rockland, Mass., for defendant-appellant., Henry H. Hammond, Asst. U. S. Atty.
485 F.2d 679, First National Bank of Minneapolisv.Order of Saint Paul, First Hermit--The Pauline Fathers, 73-1310, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Third Circuit, 10/26/73, E.D.Pa., 354 F. Supp. 303, AFFIRMED
502 F.2d 1159, Jacksonv.Kozol, 73-1307, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 11/26/73, 1, D.Mass., AFFIRMED
502 F.2d 1159, Schellerv.Burke, 73-1296, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 12/10/73, 1, D.Mass., AFFIRMED
502 F.2d 1159, Jamesv.U. S., 73-1294, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 12/5/73, D.R.I., 358 F. Supp. 1381, VACATED AND REMANDED
502 F.2d 1158, Laamanv.Vitek, 73-1288, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 10/18/73, D.N.H., 361 F. Supp. 1238, AFFIRMED
502 F.2d 1159, Pagev.Shovan, 73-1284, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS First Circuit, 12/5/73, 1, D.Mass., AFFIRMED
489 F.2d 704, Fed., 1, On August 3, 1973, Spencer filed with the district court its complaint against Armonk Industries, Inc., eight other corporate defendants, and four individual defendants alleging common law fraud and federal securities law violations. Is a purely private note a security
