No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
RUSCON CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
ACROW CAROLINA, INC., Appellee
v.
ACROW CAROLINA, INC., Appellee
12373.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Nov 4, 1968.
Published opinion
402 F.2d 989
T. E. Pedersen, Charleston, S. C., for appellant., J. Carlton Fleming, Charlotte, N. C. (Fleming, Robinson & Bradshaw, Charlotte, N. C., on brief), for appellee.
Boreman, Craven, Per Curiam, Sobeloff.
Published
PER CURIAM:
The issues which arose in this case between a general contractor and his subcontractor are chiefly factual. There was conflict in the evidence which the District Judge resolved in a manner substantially supported in the record. We cannot say that his findings are clearly erroneous,. and we find no error in the interpretation of the contract between the parties or other error of law.
Affirmed.