TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Oscar H. Steiner v. Joseph Wertheimer

Oscar H. STEINER, Appellant, v. Joseph WERTHEIMER, Appellee

Steiner v. Wertheimer, 250 F.2d 574 (6th Cir. 1957)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 10, 1957
Docket
No. 13149
Judges
Allen, Miller, Boyd
Citations
250 F.2d 5741957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4179

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This cause, having been removed from the state court to the United States District Court, was dismissed by the District Court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment from which ruling this appeal was taken.

It appears from the record, briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties that numerous factual issues, involving two different legal theories in support of the relief sought, are raised by the petition and the answer, and that defendant’s motion for summary judgment was sustained by the District Court by the mere entry of an order to that effect without accompanying or explanatory statement showing why in its opinion none of said issues were not genuine issues or upon what particular facts its ruling was based, assuming that some of the factual issues may not have been genuine, or the legal basis for the order of dismissal.

The Court is of the opinion that the record in its present shape does not present the solid basis of findings based on litigation or uncontradicted facts or the views of the District Judge with respect to the legal issues involved, that should precede our review of the judgment rendered in this case. The factual situation should be fully developed through the usual trial procedure in the District Court, instead of summary judgment proceedings. Kennedy v. Silas Mason Co., 334 U.S. 249, 256-257 , 68 S.Ct. 1031 , 92 L.Ed. 1347 ; Stevens v. Howard D. Johnson Co., 4 Cir., 181 F.2d 390, 394 ; Estepp v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co., 6 Cir., 192 F.2d 889 ; Hoy v. Progress Pattern Co., 6 Cir., 217 F.2d 701, 704 .

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed herein.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1957: 11962: 11964: 11969: 11970: 119572026peak 1957 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Bohn Aluminum & Brass Corporation v. Storm King Corporation303 F.2d 425 (6th Cir. 1962)
  2. Park County Implement Co. v. Craig397 P.2d 800 (Wyo. 1964)
  3. Wilson v. Albuquerque Board of Realtors472 P.2d 371 (N.M. 1970)
  4. California Airmotive Corporation v. C. W. Jones, Etc.415 F.2d 554 (6th Cir. 1969)
  5. Steiner v. Wertheimer252 F.2d 788 (6th Cir. 1957)

Most recent

  1. Wilson v. Albuquerque Board of Realtors472 P.2d 371 (N.M. 1970)
  2. California Airmotive Corporation v. C. W. Jones, Etc.415 F.2d 554 (6th Cir. 1969)
  3. Park County Implement Co. v. Craig397 P.2d 800 (Wyo. 1964)
  4. Bohn Aluminum & Brass Corporation v. Storm King Corporation303 F.2d 425 (6th Cir. 1962)
  5. Steiner v. Wertheimer252 F.2d 788 (6th Cir. 1957)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Kennedy v. Silas Mason Co., 334 U.S. 249 (1948) 233
Stevens v. Howard D. Johnson Co., 181 F.2d 390 (4th Cir. 1950) 322
Estepp v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., 192 F.2d 889 (6th Cir. 1951) 22
Hoy v. Progress Pattern Co., 217 F.2d 701 (6th Cir. 1954) 13

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list