Carrigan v. The Charles Pitman

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

Carrigan v. The Charles Pitman

5 F. Cas. 149, 1 Wall. Jr. 307, 1849 U.S. App. LEXIS 368

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania

DecidedApril 14, 1849

StatusPublished

This text of 5 F. Cas. 149 (Carrigan v. The Charles Pitman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carrigan v. The Charles Pitman, 5 F. Cas. 149, 1 Wall. Jr. 307, 1849 U.S. App. LEXIS 368 (circtedpa 1849).

Pincite

Opinion

GRIER, Circuit Justice.

The practice at this bar having been for many years to proceed de novo in the testimony. I hardly feel at liberty now to change it; though I have rather grumbled in one or two cases; where parties finding out from the opinion of the district judge where their case pinched, have taken new testimony here to help them out of their difficulty; and have thus presented so different a ease to me, that I have reversed my Brother Kane’s decisions, when they were perfectly right, upon the facts presented to him. But under such circumstances I have allowed no costs to the party succeeding, and generally speaking, should think this rule to be but equitable. Rule allowed.

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

GRIER, Circuit Justice.

The practice at this bar having been for many years to proceed de novo in the testimony. I hardly feel at liberty now to change it; though I have rather grumbled in one or two cases; where parties finding out from the opinion of the district judge where their case pinched, have taken new testimony here to help them out of their difficulty; and have thus presented so different a ease to me, that I have reversed my Brother Kane’s decisions, when they were perfectly right, upon the facts presented to him. But under such circumstances I have allowed no costs to the party succeeding, and generally speaking, should think this rule to be but equitable. Rule allowed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 F. Cas. 149, 1 Wall. Jr. 307, 1849 U.S. App. LEXIS 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carrigan-v-the-charles-pitman-circtedpa-1849.