Willie Moore v. Irving Fleishman, Trading as Sol Inv. Co., 264 F.2d 575 (D.C. Cir. 1959). · Go Syfert
Search
Willie Moore v. Irving Fleishman, Trading as Sol Inv. Co., 264 F.2d 575 (D.C. Cir. 1959). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events across 9 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Local Lodge No. 1424, International Ass'n of MacHinists v. National Labor Relations Board (scotus, 1960-04-25)
Treatment trajectory · 1959 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1959 1992 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) Local Lodge No. 1424, International Ass'n of MacHinists v. National Labor Relations Board (8×)
SCOTUS · 1960 · confidence medium
C., at 108, 264 F. 2d at 581 (emphasis by the court).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." National Labor Relations Board v. Local 294, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America
2d Cir. · 1960 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Lodge 1424 v. N.L.R.B., 105 U.S.App.D.C. 102 , 264 F.2d 575 , 582, reversed on other grounds, 362 U.S. 411 , 80 S.Ct. 822 , 4 L.Ed.2d 832 ; N.L.R.B. v. Local 404, 1 Cir., 205 F.2d 99 , 104 N.L.R.B. v. Spiewak, 3 Cir., 179 F.2d 695, 698 . 15 The motion for rehearing is granted.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Willie MOORE, Appellant,
v.
Irving FLEISHMAN, Et Al., Trading as Sol Investment Company, Appellees
14656.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Feb 26, 1959.
264 F.2d 575
Mr. Fred C. Sacks, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. Herman Miller, Washington, D. C., for appellees.
Edgerton, Danaher, Bastían.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Appellees [defendants] moved to dismiss this appeal for alleged failure by appellant [plaintiff] to comply with the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b), 28 U.S.C.A. The record shows, however, that the District Court not only granted summary judgment in favor of defendants Fleishman and Riskin, but certified the case against the remaining defendant, Eastern Credit Association, for trial in the Municipal Court. We think that, under the circumstances of this case, Rule 54(b) does not apply. The motion to dismiss will be denied.

On the merits, we find no error affecting substantial rights. The judgment appealed from will, therefore, be affirmed. This will be without prejudice to the right of appellant to proceed with the case against the remaining defendant, Eastern Credit Association. Of course, we express no opinion as to the merits of the claim as against this remaining defendant.

Motion to dismiss appeal is denied and judgment affirmed.