Skip to main content
· 8/26/1980

Daniel v. Ansul Co.

Citations

  • 547 F. Supp. 5
  • 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17085

How courts have described this case

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

  • considering sufficiency-of-the-evidence argument made in the “statement of facts” in the brief, even though the appellant had “not devoted a specific section of his brief” to that argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kazen

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.