AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MOHASCO INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellant, v. E.T. BARWICK MILLS, INC. and Barwick Carpet Mills, Inc., Appellees.

PER CURIAM:

In petition for rehearing appellant takes us to task for use of the words in our opinion that we are in agreement "with the result reached by the trial court," and concludes that we have held by implication that some of the findings of the trial court were clearly erroneous and that we may have disapproved of rules of law applied by the trial court. Such interpretation is incorrect. We consider the opinion of the District Court sufficiently informative, and a correct disposition of the issues presented.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the petition for rehearing be, and the same is hereby denied, 5 Cir., 340 F.2d 319, which affirmed D.C., 221 F. Supp. 191.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MOHASCO INDUSTRIES, INC. v. E.T. BARWICK MILLS
(Mar 18, 1965)