Lee Herman and Victor Herman v. Eagle Star Insurance Company, Ltd., Etc.

396 F.2d 427, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7431
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 5, 1968·No. 21556·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this diversity action against three insurance companies on a claim under certain policies of insurance for the loss of a $35,000 diamond ring, judgment was entered for the defendants on a jury verdict. Plaintiffs appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting evidence concerning the polygraph of plaintiff Lee Herman, the purport of which evidence was that she had made untruthful statements concerning the loss of the ring.

In admitting the polygraph testimony the trial court did not pass upon the reliability of evidence of this character but ruled that it was admissible in view of what the court regarded as a binding stipulation entered into before trial. We affirm for the reasons stated by the trial court in its memorandum opinion denying plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial, reported in 283 F.Supp. 33.

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

Lee Herman and Victor Herman v. Eagle Star Insurance Company, Ltd., Etc., 396 F.2d 427, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 7431 (9th Cir. 1968).

396 F.2d 427 (Lee Herman and Victor Herman v. Eagle Star Insurance Company, Ltd., Etc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Torres v. Jorrin
S.D. California, 2021
United States v. Juan A. Benavidez-Benavidez
217 F.3d 720 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
United States v. Fernando Asi Garzon
103 F.3d 142 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)
Davis v. State
516 So. 2d 953 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Jeff D. v. Evans
743 F.2d 648 (Ninth Circuit, 1984)
Jeff v. Evans
743 F.2d 648 (Ninth Circuit, 1984)
State v. Dean
307 N.W.2d 628 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1981)
United States v. Joseph Armand Oliver
525 F.2d 731 (Eighth Circuit, 1976)
People v. Leone
255 N.E.2d 696 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)