Durham v. Fitzharris

Fourth Circuit

Durham v. Fitzharris

389 F.2d 731

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided January 26, 1968·No. No. 11669·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal, the findings of the district judge, to whom the case was submitted by stipulation when the jury was unable to agree, that the named defendant was the driver of the car at the time that the plaintiffs’ decedent lost her life, and that he was grossly negligent in its operation, are attacked as “clearly erroneous.” Though largely circumstantial, there was sufficient evidence to support them.

The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal, the findings of the district judge, to whom the case was submitted by stipulation when the jury was unable to agree, that the named defendant was the driver of the car at the time that the plaintiffs’ decedent lost her life, and that he was grossly negligent in its operation, are attacked as “clearly erroneous.” Though largely circumstantial, there was sufficient evidence to support them.

The judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Durham v. Fitzharris, 389 F.2d 731 (4th Cir. 1968).

Pincite

389 F.2d 731 (Durham v. Fitzharris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.