1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 6 F.Supp.
  5. 6 F.Supp. 515 (1933)
 

PROSPERITY CO. v. AMERICAN LAUNDRY MACHINERY CO.

No. 628.

6 F.Supp. 515 (1933)

PROSPERITY CO., Inc., v. AMERICAN LAUNDRY MACHINERY CO.

District Court, S. D. Ohio, W. D.

October 20, 1933.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wood & Wood, of Cincinnati, Ohio (Wm. R. Wood, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Bohleber & Ledbetter, J. C. Ledbetter, and Francis H. Fassett, all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Allen & Allen, of Cincinnati, Ohio (Marston Allen and Peck, Shaffer & Williams, all of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Brockett, Hyde, Higley & Meyer and Elbert L. Hyde, all of Cleveland, Ohio, of counsel), for defendant.

NEVIN, District Judge.

This cause is now before the court on a motion filed on behalf of the defendant, the American Laundry Machinery Company, wherein the defendant prays the court for leave to file a counterclaim (attached to the motion) against the plaintiff, and, in the event this prayer is granted, that the court order that United Shoe Machinery Corporation be brought in as a party defendant in this proceeding.

...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases