1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 45 F.Supp.
  5. 45 F.Supp. 201 (1942)
 

HUDEPOHL BREWING CO. v. BANNISTER

C. A. 315.

45 F.Supp. 201 (1942)

HUDEPOHL BREWING CO. v. BANNISTER.

District Court, W. D. South Carolina.

May 20, 1942.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Blythe & Bonham, of Greenville, S. C., and Watkins & Prince, of Anderson, S. C., for plaintiff.

Oscar H. Doyle and T. S. Banister, both of Anderson, S. C., for defendant.

WYCHE, District Judge.

The matter before me in this controversy is the motion of the defendant to dismiss the action upon the ground that the complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b), Civil Rules of Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

The allegations of the complaint pertinent to this motion, are, as follows:

"2. That * * * C. F. Gibson, T. A Moore, Jr., and W. R. Bannister, the latter being the son of...

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