Case ID: f_275/html/1021-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ARMINIUS CHEMICAL CO. v. ACME MFG. CO.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    July 5, 1921.)
    No. 1893.
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Action at law by the Acme Manufacturing Company against the Arminius Chemical Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
    Affirmed.
    For prior opinion, see 264 Fed. 27.
    Certiorari denied 256 U. S., 42 Sup. Ct. 55, 66 L. Ed.
    —Before KNAPP and WOODS, Circuit Judges, and AVATKINS, District Judge.
    C. V. Meredith, of Richmond, Va., and R. L. Gordon, Jr., of Louisa, 'Va. (Meredith & Meredith, of Richmond, Va., arid Gordon & Gordon, of Louisa, Va., on the brief), for plaintiff in error.
    T. D. Savage, of Norfolk, Va., for defendant in error.
   PER CURIAM.

The opinion of this court on a previous appeal, Acme Mfg. Co. v. Arminius Chemical Co., 264 Fed. 27, is the law of the case, in accordance with which another trial has been had, and the resulting judgment should be affirmed, unless the facts now before us are materially different. It is enough to say, without reviewing the evidence, that careful comparison discloses no substantial variance. On the vital issues the proofs at the second trial were essentially the same as at the first. The case is therefore governed by our former decision. Affirmed.