First Nat. Bank of Houston v. Wells, Fargo & Co.

Fifth Circuit

First Nat. Bank of Houston v. Wells, Fargo & Co.

127 F. 818, 62 C.C.A. 134, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 3838

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 1904

DocketNo. 1,303

StatusPublished

This text of 127 F. 818 (First Nat. Bank of Houston v. Wells, Fargo & 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

First Nat. Bank of Houston v. Wells, Fargo & Co., 127 F. 818, 62 C.C.A. 134, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 3838 (5th Cir. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On the trial of this case, pending over four days before the court and jury, a great many witnesses were examined on the several issues of fact presented. In the main, and on all important and material questions, the rulings of the trial judge were correct. To corroborate an unimpeached and uncontradicted witness in relation to unquestioned detail, the court, at the instance of counsel for defendant in error, and over the objection of counsel for plaintiff in error, admitted evidence — particularly a certain telegram received by a witness — which should have been excluded. While this was erroneous, we are of opinion that it could not and did not really prejudice the plaintiff in error, and that, on the whole record, no reversible error appears.

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.

On the trial of this case, pending over four days before the court and jury, a great many witnesses were examined on the several issues of fact presented. In the main, and on all important and material questions, the rulings of the trial judge were correct. To corroborate an unimpeached and uncontradicted witness in relation to unquestioned detail, the court, at the instance of counsel for defendant in error, and over the objection of counsel for plaintiff in error, admitted evidence — particularly a certain telegram received by a witness — which should have been excluded. While this was erroneous, we are of opinion that it could not and did not really prejudice the plaintiff in error, and that, on the whole record, no reversible error appears.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 F. 818, 62 C.C.A. 134, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 3838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-of-houston-v-wells-fargo-co-ca5-1904.