U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1967

Bulletin Company v. Victor E. Origoni

Bulletin Company v. Victor E. Origoni
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided May 8, 1967 · Wright, McGowan, Robinson
387 F.2d 240; 128 U.S. App. D.C. 282; 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6481 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. John R. McConnell, Philadelphia, Pa., of the bar of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. William J. Curtin, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant., Mr. Thomas M. O’Malley, Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Bulletin Company v. Victor E. Origoni

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on for hearing on the record on appeal from the United States *241 District Court for the District of Columbia, and was argued by counsel.

This interlocutory appeal certifies for our consideration the question as to whether Layne v. Tribune Co., 63 App.D.C. 213, 71 F.2d 223, cert. denied, 293 U.S. 572, 55 S.Ct. 83, 79 L.Ed. 670 (1934), and Neely v. Philadelphia Inquirer Co., 61 App.D.C. 334, 62 F.2d 873 (1932), have been overruled sub silentio. We hold that they have not.

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court denying the motion to quash service of summons and dismiss the complaint be, and it is hereby, reversed.

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