U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1952

Buckeye Steamship Company v. Joseph McDonough Adm'r, Etc.

Buckeye Steamship Company v. Joseph McDonough Adm'r, Etc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided December 19, 1952 · Martin, McALLISTER, Miller, Per Curiam
200 F.2d 558; 1953 A.M.C. 343 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Buckeye Steamship Company v. Joseph McDonough Adm'r, Etc.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause has been heard and considered on the findings of fact, the conclusions of law and the opinion of the District Judge, D.C., 103 F.Supp. 473, on the entire record in the cause and the briefs and oral arguments of the attorneys for the parties;

From all of which it appears that the findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and are not clearly erroneous, but indeed are virtually unchallenged, and that the conclusions of law are correctly drawn for the reasons stated in the opinion of the court;

And, upon the basis of the authorities cited in the opinion of the District Judge. See especially Lavender v. Kurn, 327 U.S. 645, 653, 66 S.Ct. 740, 90 L.Ed. 916; O’Donnell v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., 318 U.S. 36, 63 S.Ct. 488, 87 L.Ed. 596; Tiller v. Atlantic Coastline R. Co., 318 U.S. 54, 67, 63 S.Ct. 444, 87 L.Ed. 610; Marceau v. Great Lakes Transit Corp., 2 Cir., 146 F.2d 416, 418; Wong Bar v. Suburban Pet. Transport, Inc., 2 Cir., 119 F.2d 745.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

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