Charles S. Woodruff v. Schering Corporation and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company and Globe Indemnity Co.

324 F.2d 958
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 27, 1964
Docket20617
StatusPublished

This text of 324 F.2d 958 (Charles S. Woodruff v. Schering Corporation and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company and Globe Indemnity Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Charles S. Woodruff v. Schering Corporation and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company and Globe Indemnity Co., 324 F.2d 958 (5th Cir. 1964).

Opinion

*959 PER curiam:.

The unsuccessful plaintiff, recognizing the adequacy of the record to support the jury verdict against him, seeks a reversal because of alleged erroneous instructions. We have carefully examined the Court’s instructions and find them free from prejudicial error.

After a hard fought trial, the jury, with ample evidence and the opportunity to observe the witnesses, resolved the issues of negligence in favor of defendant. Appellant’s contentions are without merit. The judgment is

Affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
324 F.2d 958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charles-s-woodruff-v-schering-corporation-and-aetna-casualty-and-surety-ca5-1964.