IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, FOR A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AGAINST AND/OR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE HONORABLE OLIVER B. DICKINSON, DISTRICT JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, FOR A WRIT OF PROHIBITION AGAINST AND/OR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE HONORABLE OLIVER B. DICKINSON, DISTRICT JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, AND THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
48 F.2d 128
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1931)
Caution
Cited by 25 cases
Opinion of the Court
The questions raised on this motion are substantially the same as those raised on a like motion of the Eastman Kodak Company, a New Jersey Corporation, 48 F.(2d) 125, which we have just considered and decided.
The motion of this petitioner for a writ of prohibition is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Scott v. Beams, 122 F.2d 777 (10th Cir. 1941)
-
Morse v. Lewis, 54 F.2d 1027 (4th Cir. 1932)
-
Ill. Citizens Comm. FOR Broad. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States, 515 F.2d 397 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Eastman Kodak Co., 48 F.2d 125 (3d Cir. 1931)