Beck v. Acme Markets, Inc.

Third Circuit

Beck v. Acme Markets, Inc.

131 F.2d 51, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2706

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided October 26, 1942·No. No. 8092·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Our consideration of the testimony and the charge of the trial judge satisfies us that the questions of negligence and contributory negligence which this case raises were for the jury and that they were submitted by the trial judge in a charge which contained no prejudicial error.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court entered upon the verdict returned for the plaintiff is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Our consideration of the testimony and the charge of the trial judge satisfies us that the questions of negligence and contributory negligence which this case raises were for the jury and that they were submitted by the trial judge in a charge which contained no prejudicial error.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court entered upon the verdict returned for the plaintiff is affirmed.

Beck v. Acme Markets, Inc., 131 F.2d 51, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 2706 (3d Cir. 1942).

Pincite

131 F.2d 51 (Beck v. Acme Markets, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.