Walter W. Krantz v. Richard W. Van Dette & Virgil P. Van Dette, 272 F.2d 709 (6th Cir. 1959). · Go Syfert
Search
Walter W. Krantz v. Richard W. Van Dette & Virgil P. Van Dette, 272 F.2d 709 (6th Cir. 1959). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
31 citation events across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Finch v. Hughes Aircraft Co. (mdctspecapp, 1984-01-11)
Treatment trajectory · 1960 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1960 1993 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Finch v. Hughes Aircraft Co.
Md. Ct. Spec. App. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See Krantz v. Van Dette, 165 F.Supp. 776, 780 (N.D.Ohio, 1958), aff’d. 272 F.2d 709 (6th Cir., 1959); Blackburn v. Allen, 218 Cal.App.2d 30 , 32 Cal.Rptr. 211 (1963). (2) Fiduciary relationship Plaintiffs argue that a fiduciary relationship arose between Hughes, on the one hand, and Mr. Finch and Dr. McLean, on the other, because all were engaged in a joint venture.
cited Cited "see" Sochurek v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1961 · signal: see · confidence high
See Joyce de la Begassiere , 31 T.C. 1031 (1959) , affirmed per curiam 272 F. 2d 709 (C.A. 5, 1959), where the issue of alien residence in the United States was involved.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Walter W. KRANTZ, Appellant,
v.
Richard W. VAN DETTE and Virgil P. Van Dette, Appellees
13801.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Dec 19, 1959.
272 F.2d 709
A. H. Oldham, Akron, Ohio, Lee C. McCandless, Butler, Pa., Robert E. Woodhams, of Woodhams, Blanchard & Flynn, Kalamazoo, Mich., on brief, for appellant., Francis J. Klempay, Youngstown, Ohio, for appellees.
Martin, Cecil, Miller.
Published
PER CURIAM.

After a comprehensive trial in the district court, the complaint of the appellant-inventor, asking recovery against appellees of royalties under three license agreements, was dismissed. From the order of dismissal, this appeal is taken and has been heard and duly considered[*710] upon the oral arguments and briefs of the attorneys and upon the record in the case.

Judge Weick, the trial judge, now a member of this court, wrote an opinion carefully discussing the pertinent issues in the case; and, in our view, correctly deciding them.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the opinion of the district court reported at 165 F.Supp. 776, the order dismissing the complaint is affirmed.