U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1954

Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. Dimock

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided February 5, 1954

210 F.2d 376 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Shearman & Sterling & Wright, New York City, for petitioner; John A. Wilson, New York City, of counsel., Burlingham, Hupper & Kennedy, New York City, for Holland-American Line in support of petitioner; Harold M. Kennedy and Hervey C. Allen, Jr., New York City, of counsel., Bennet, House & Couts, New York. City, for Arnold Bernstein, plaintiff below, in opposition; Victor House, Albert I. Edelman and Werner Usen, New York City, of counsel.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Chemical Bank & Trust Company v. Honorable Edward J. Dimock, United States District Judge (2d Cir. 1954)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner charges that Judge Dimock disregarded our mandate in Bernstein v. N. V. Nederlandsehe-Amerikaansche Stoomvaart-Maatschappij (Chemical Bank & Trust Co.), 2 Cir., 173 F.2d 71, 75-76, but since we have amended our mandate in this case, 2 Cir., 210 F.2d 375, we find it unnecessary to pass on the validity of the petitioner’s contentions or the propriety of resort to mandamus.

Petition denied.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.