Skip to main content
· 8/18/1930

Crowell Elevator Co. v. Allen

Citations

  • 43 F.2d 772
  • 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 168
  • 1930 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1362
  • 1930 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9544
  • 9 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 168

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • reversing judgment for plaintiff because expert testimony was lacking and was required for recovery of damages
  • reversing judgment for plaintiff because expert testimony, which was lacking, was required for recovery of damages

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Woodrough

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.