Creary v. Wefel

Fifth Circuit

Creary v. Wefel

135 F. 304, 67 C.C.A. 661, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4320

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 15, 1905

DocketNo. 1,423

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 135 F. 304 (Creary v. Wefel) 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

Creary v. Wefel, 135 F. 304, 67 C.C.A. 661, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4320 (5th Cir. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error brought to this court, duly-incorporated in a bill of exceptions, all of the evidence adduced on the trial in the court below, and, as his first assignment of error in this court, insists that the court below erred in refusing peremptory instruction to the jury to find thereon a verdict in his favor. A full examination and consideration of this evidence in the light of the pleadings has satisfied a majority of the judges that the evidence warranted and required a verdict in favor of the defendant in error, and that the same as rendered does substantial justice between the parties. It follows that the first assignment of error is not well taken, and that the other assignments, all relating to charges given and refused, need not be, and they are not, considered.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error brought to this court, duly-incorporated in a bill of exceptions, all of the evidence adduced on the trial in the court below, and, as his first assignment of error in this court, insists that the court below erred in refusing peremptory instruction to the jury to find thereon a verdict in his favor. A full examination and consideration of this evidence in the light of the pleadings has satisfied a majority of the judges that the evidence warranted and required a verdict in favor of the defendant in error, and that the same as rendered does substantial justice between the parties. It follows that the first assignment of error is not well taken, and that the other assignments, all relating to charges given and refused, need not be, and they are not, considered.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 F. 304, 67 C.C.A. 661, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creary-v-wefel-ca5-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack