MINNIOLA O. MILLER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
RUSSELL L. GILLETTE, ROSE M. GILLETTE ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
MINNIOLA O. MILLER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
RUSSELL L. GILLETTE, ROSE M. GILLETTE ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES
267 F.2d 783
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1959)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
In Miller v. Town of Suffield, 2 Cir., 249 F. 2d 16, we affirmed Judge Smith’s dismissal of plaintiff's antitrust action which we characterized as an attempt to revive certain “fantastic claims of fraud and conspiracy” rejected in earlier litigation. The Supreme Court denied certiorari, 356 U.S. 978, 78 S.Ct. 1143, 2 L.Ed.2d 1151, and then a motion for rehearing, 358 U.S. 859, 79 S.Ct. 16, 3 L.Ed.2d 93. After our affirmance Judge Smith, on motion of certain defendants, dissolved an attachment pendente lite upon their property and plaintiff has appealed. She has failed, however, to show any reason why the order was not only within the power of the district court, but also required upon the termination of her action. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
ORR v. Trinter, 444 F.2d 128 (6th Cir. 1971)
Authorities Cited
- Hinkle v. New England Mut. Ins. Co. of Boston, 358 U.S. 65 (U.S. 1958)
- Buxton v. Michigan, 356 U.S. 978 (U.S. 1958)
- Minniola O. Miller v. The Town OF Suffield, 249 F.2d 16 (2d Cir. 1957)
- Harmon v. United States, 358 U.S. 859 (U.S. 1958)
- Cato v. California, 358 U.S. 859 (U.S. 1958)