Hanaway v. Guarantee Savings, Loan & Investment Co.

143 F. 962, 75 C.C.A. 148, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 3810
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 13, 1906·No. No. 1,519·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A majority of the judges find that the only question presented for review on this writ is whether or not the plaintiff in error is entitled to have a new trial on the grounds alleged in the motion filed in the court below. The application for a new -trial was based upon matters of fact aliunde the record, and upon alleged errors on the trial not incorporated in the record by any bili of exception seasonably taken on the trial.

The question presented is not open to review in this court. See Henderson v. Moore, 5 Cranch, 11, 3 L. Ed. 22; Wilson v. Everett, 139 U. S. 616, 11 Sup. Ct. 664, 35 L. Ed. 286; Ætna Life Ins. Co. v. Ward, 140 U. S. 91, 11 Sup. Ct. 730, 35 L. Ed. 371; Moore v. United States, 150 U. S. 61, 14 Sup. Ct. 26, 37 L. Ed. 996.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Hanaway v. Guarantee Savings, Loan & Investment Co., 143 F. 962, 75 C.C.A. 148, 1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 3810 (5th Cir. 1906).

143 F. 962 (Hanaway v. Guarantee Savings, Loan & Investment Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henderson v. Moore
9 U.S. 11 (Supreme Court, 1809)
Wilson v. Everett
139 U.S. 616 (Supreme Court, 1891)
Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Ward
140 U.S. 76 (Supreme Court, 1891)
In Re Washington & Georgetown Railroad
140 U.S. 91 (Supreme Court, 1891)
Moore v. United States
150 U.S. 57 (Supreme Court, 1893)