0% found this document useful (0 votes)
20 views1 page

United States v. Vincent Landers, 219 F.2d 223, 2d Cir. (1954)

The United States sued Vincent Landers for damages for failing to perform a contract to purchase surplus government property. The district court found for the United States. Landers appealed. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision in favor of the United States in less than 3 sentences.
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
20 views1 page

United States v. Vincent Landers, 219 F.2d 223, 2d Cir. (1954)

The United States sued Vincent Landers for damages for failing to perform a contract to purchase surplus government property. The district court found for the United States. Landers appealed. The appeals court affirmed the district court's decision in favor of the United States in less than 3 sentences.
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

219 F.

2d 223

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,


v.
Vincent LANDERS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 33.
Docket 23108.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.


Argued December 8, 1954.
Decided December 20, 1954.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York; Vincent L. Leibell, Judge.
Defendant, Vincent Landers, appeals from a judgment on the merits for
plaintiff, United States of America, in an action for damages for failure to
perform a contract to purchase surplus government property.
Robert W. Sweet, Asst. U. S. Atty., New York City (J. Edward Lumbard,
U. S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellee.
Andrew J. Dritsas, New York City (Albert Barnett Klepper, New York
City, on the brief), for defendant-appellant.
Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and L. HAND and MEDINA, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the opinion of District Judge Leibell, 128 F.Supp. 97.

You might also like