1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 83 F.Supp.
  5. 83 F.Supp. 966 (1949)
 

ANDREWS v. CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO.

Civil Action No. 1345-49.

83 F.Supp. 966 (1949)

ANDREWS v. CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO. et al.

United States District Court District of Columbia.

May 9, 1949.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles E. Ford, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff, for the motion.

Edmund L. Jones, of Washington, D. C., for defendant Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co., and

Samuel K. Abrams, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Washington, D. C., for defendant Fay, opposed.

HOLTZOFF, District Judge.

The plaintiff alleges in her complaint that she received a letter from the defendant telephone company to the effect that the company has been advised by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia that his office is in possession of competent evidence that the plaintiff's telephone is being used in violation of the statutes prohibiting gambling in the District of Columbia and that the United States Attorney has requested the...

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