M. T. Craig v. Texaco, Inc., 326 F.2d 971 (4th Cir. 1964). · Go Syfert
Search
M. T. Craig v. Texaco, Inc., 326 F.2d 971 (4th Cir. 1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
51 citation events across 29 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Crockett v. Citizens and Southern Financial Corp. (gand, 1972-09-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964 1995 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Crockett v. Citizens and Southern Financial Corp.
N.D. Ga. · 1972 · signal: see · confidence high
See Freeling v. F.D.I.C., 221 F.Supp. 955 (W.D.Okla.1962), aff’d. 326 F.2d 971 (10th Cir. 1963).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Amoco Production Company v. United States
10th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Freeling v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., 221 F.Supp. 955, 956 (W.D.Okla.1962), aff'd, 326 F.2d 971 (10th Cir.1963) (control of corporation by Congress leads to conclusion FDIC is a federal agency of the United States) 7 The district court's reference to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13(d) and its argument that plaintiffs are somehow enlarging their substantive rights against the United States, record, vol. 1, doc. 135, at 7-8, are not well founded.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Amoco Production Co. v. United States
10th Cir. · 1988 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Freeling v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., 221 F.Supp. 955, 956 (W.D.Okla.1962), aff’d, 326 F.2d 971 (10th Cir.1963) (control of corporation by Congress leads to conclusion FDIC is a federal agency of the United States). .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
M. T. CRAIG, Appellant,
v.
TEXACO, INC., Appellee
9167.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jan 22, 1964.
326 F.2d 971
George Rountree, Jr., Wilmington, N. C. (Rountree & Clark, Wilmington, N. G., on brief), for appellant., Lonnie B. Williams and Alan A. Marshall, Wilmington, N. C. (Poisson, Marshall, Barnhill & Williams, Wilmington, N. C., on brief), for appellee.
Sobeloff, Boreman, Bell.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This is an action involving defendant’s termination of a contract and lease which, it is claimed, were procured through fraud and misrepresentation on the part of the defendant. Upon the record before it, the District Court found that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We find no error. D.C., 218 F.Supp. 789.

Affirmed.