Harry H. OSHRIN, Appellant, v. Emma B. UNDERWOOD, Appellee, 296 F.2d 733

PER CURIAM. The Court has carefully studied the record and briefs in this case. We hold that the district court did not err in refusing to find for the appellant on the theory of a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment. We affirm too the district court’s holding that the evidence offered by the plaintiff-appellant to show damages was insufficient to support any tenable theory of recovery. The judgment is Affirmed.