Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • John C. RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Henry J. Kaiser Company and Perini Corporation

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views1 page
    1. John Richardson appealed a judgment in favor of Walsh Construction Company, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Henry J. Kaiser Company, and Perini Corporation from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 2. This case was previously before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the judgment in favor of the defendants and remanded the case for a new trial. 3. Following the second trial, which again resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants, Richardson again appealed. The Third Circuit found the grounds for appeal to be without merit and affirmed the lower court's judgment.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1966-12-05 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 368 F.2d 575 Docket: 15888_1

    Original Title

    John C. Richardson v. Walsh Construction Company, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Henry J. Kaiser Company and Perini Corporation, 368 F.2d 575, 3rd Cir. (1966)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1. John Richardson appealed a judgment in favor of Walsh Construction Company, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Henry J. Kaiser Company, and Perini Corporation from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 2. This case was previously before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the judgment in favor of the defendants and remanded the case for a new trial. 3. Following the second trial, which again resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants, Richardson again appealed. The Third Circuit found the grounds for appeal to be without merit and affirmed the lower court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views1 page

    John C. RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Henry J. Kaiser Company and Perini Corporation

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1. John Richardson appealed a judgment in favor of Walsh Construction Company, Morrison-Knudsen Company, Henry J. Kaiser Company, and Perini Corporation from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 2. This case was previously before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the judgment in favor of the defendants and remanded the case for a new trial. 3. Following the second trial, which again resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants, Richardson again appealed. The Third Circuit found the grounds for appeal to be without merit and affirmed the lower court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    368 F.

    2d 575

    John C. RICHARDSON, Appellant,


    v.
    WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Morrison-Knudsen
    Company, Inc., Henry J. Kaiser Company and Perini
    Corporation.
    No. 15888.

    United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.


    Argued November 4, 1966.
    Decided December 5, 1966.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    Pennsylvania; Louis Rosenberg, Judge.
    Hymen Schlesinger, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.
    William C. Walker, Pittsburgh, Pa., Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote,
    Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellees.
    Before GANEY, SMITH and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges.
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    PER CURIAM.

    This matter was heretofore before this court on an appeal from a judgment in
    favor of the defendants, 334 F.2d 334 (1964). The said judgment was reversed
    and the action was remanded to the court below with directions that a new trial
    be had. The second trial resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants and
    the present appeal followed. We have carefully considered the record of the
    second trial and find that the grounds urged in support of reversal are clearly
    without merit.

    The judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

    You might also like