v0856-341

No. 2361

IN THE

United States Circuit Court of Appeals

For the Ninth Circuit

THE CONNELL BROTHEES COMPANY

(a coriDoration),

Plaintiff in Error,

vs.

DIEDERICHSEN & COMPANY,

Defendant in Error.

BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT IN ERROR.

In reply to brief heretofore filed in the above-

entitled cause for plaintiff in error, we will argue

the points hereinafter set forth, and will refer

to the parties hereto as they were designated in

the trial court.

THE PLAINTIFF IS NOT PRECLUDED FROM RECOVERY BY A

SLIT IN THE PARTNERSHIP NAME.

(a) In the first place we call the court's atten-

tion to the stipulation entered into between plain-

---

archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs0856

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0856

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0856#page/n340/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

contract, flour, bank, goods, february, shipment, lading, bill, trans, shipped, buyer, submit, delay, stipulation, steamer

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

wells fargo, steamer sailing, seattle bank, national bank, fargo nevada, defend ant, contingent clause, centennial mill, written contract, nevada national, merchants exchange, lading itself, insurance policies, february march, executory contract

Document Status: UGLY