Columbus Compress Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Opinion
Under these circumstances, we are constrained to affirm the judgment of the Circuit Court; and it is so ordered.
On Application for Rehearing.
The record before us is not sufficient to show a waiver of jury by á stipulation in writing filed with the clerk, as required by Rev. St. U. S. § 649 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 525). A recital in the judgment, “that both plaintiff and defendant announcing 'Ready for trial' and formally waiving a jury in open court,” is not such a recital as this court can assume therefrom that a jury was waived by a stipulation in writing. See Kearney v. Case, 12 Wall. 275, 20 L. Ed. 395; Hodges v. Easton, 106 U. S. 408-412, 1 Sup. Ct. 307, 27 L. Ed. 169; Bond v. Dustin, 112 U. S. 607, 5 Sup. Ct. 296, 28 L. Ed. 835. Cases that control the appellate court when the jury is waived without written stipulation will be found cited in 4 Fed. St. Ann. 451. See, also, Bond v. Dustin, supra, 112 U. S. 604, 5 Sup. Ct. 296, 28 L. Ed. 835; Dundee v. Mortgage & Trust Investment Co. v. Hughes, 124 U. S. 157-160, 8 Sup. Ct. 377, 31 L. Ed. 357.
[489] The agreed record approved by the judge is a recital of the evidence, written and oral, containing an agreement that counsel should have the advantage of objection and exception to any of the foregoing matters and testimony put in evidence, as if formally heard and reserved, and is not a finding or agreed statement of the ultimate facts in the case, as required in Raimond v. Parish of Terrebonne, 132 U. S. 192, 10 Sup. Ct. 57, 33 L. Ed. 309, and like cases.
The petition for rehearing is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
186 F. 487 (Columbus Compress Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.