U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 1924

Gilman v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Decided February 8, 1924 · Davis, Eynch, Wooeeey

294 F. 422; 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2951

Counsel

Robert W. Archbald, of Scranton, Pa., and William Davis, of Ebensburg, Pa., for plaintiffs in error., Andrew B. Dunsmore, U. S. Atty., of Wellsboro, Pa., A. A. Vosburg, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Scranton, Pa., and Edward H. Horton, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., of Washington, D. C., M. J. Martin and F. E. Martin, both of Scranton, Pa., for defendant in error Boughton.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Newborn v. De Witt (Tenn. 1932)
National Union Bank v. McNeal (S.C. 1928)
White v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1926)
In re Estate of Pivonka (Iowa 1926)

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.

First indicating that no question of the jurisdiction of the District Court under the Tucker Act (24 Stat. 505) has been raised or decided, we affirm the judgment of that court on the opinion of the learned trial judge (290 Fed. 614), later fortified by the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Helmholz v. Horst, 294 Fed. 417, affirming Horst v. United States (D. C.) 283 Fed. 600.

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