Fabris v. General Foods Corp.

Second Circuit

Fabris v. General Foods Corp.

152 F.2d 660, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedDecember 28, 1945

DocketNo. 99

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 152 F.2d 660 (Fabris v. General Foods Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fabris v. General Foods Corp., 152 F.2d 660, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335 (2d Cir. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is predicated upon the district court’s refusal to set aside the verdict for misconduct of the jurors in,arriving at a verdict. The verdict was returned in open court in the presence of all the jurors. No request to poll them was made. Several days later the plaintiffs moved to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, and in support of the motion submitted an affidavit by eight of the jurors that the verdict was the result of an agreement to abide by a majority vote. Three of the eight also signed an additional affidavit that some of the jurors told them a disagreement was not permissible and for that reason they agreed to abide by a majority vote. The judgment is affirmed on the authority of McDonald v. Pless, 238 U.S. 264, 35 S.Ct. 783, 59 L.Ed. 1300; cf. United States v. Pleva, 2 Cir., 66 F.2d 529, 533.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is predicated upon the district court’s refusal to set aside the verdict for misconduct of the jurors in,arriving at a verdict. The verdict was returned in open court in the presence of all the jurors. No request to poll them was made. Several days later the plaintiffs moved to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, and in support of the motion submitted an affidavit by eight of the jurors that the verdict was the result of an agreement to abide by a majority vote. Three of the eight also signed an additional affidavit that some of the jurors told them a disagreement was not permissible and for that reason they agreed to abide by a majority vote. The judgment is affirmed on the authority of McDonald v. Pless, 238 U.S. 264, 35 S.Ct. 783, 59 L.Ed. 1300; cf. United States v. Pleva, 2 Cir., 66 F.2d 529, 533.

Western Spring Service Co., Inc., a Corporation, J. A. Hingley MacHine Company, a Partnership, J. A. Hingley MacHine Company Trust, a Business Trust, Cecil D. Hingley, Ernest A. Hingley, Josephine M. Hingley, Nell M. Hingley and Alice M. Hingley v. Merrill Andrew, Western Spring Service Co., Inc., a Corporation, J. A. Hingley MacHine Company, a Partnership, J. A. Hingley MacHine Company Trust, a Business Trust, Cecil D. Hingley, Ernest A. Hingley, Josephine M. Hingley, Nell M. Hingley and Alice M. Hingley v. Catherine Andrew

229 F.2d 413 (Tenth Circuit, 1956)

Western Spring Service Co. v. Andrew

229 F.2d 413 (Tenth Circuit, 1956)

Skidmore v. Baltimore & OR Co.

167 F.2d 54 (Second Circuit, 1948)

Jorgensen v. York Ice MacHinery Corporation

160 F.2d 432 (Second Circuit, 1947)

Old Colony Bondholders v. New York, N. H. & H. R.

161 F.2d 413 (Second Circuit, 1947)

United States v. Antonelli Fireworks Co.

155 F.2d 631 (Second Circuit, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 F.2d 660, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fabris-v-general-foods-corp-ca2-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack