Lois Hemmerle v. Riggs Dairy Express, Inc.

Third Circuit

Lois Hemmerle v. Riggs Dairy Express, Inc.

354 F.2d 661

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedJanuary 19, 1966

Docket15390_1

StatusPublished

This text of 354 F.2d 661 (Lois Hemmerle v. Riggs Dairy Express, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lois Hemmerle v. Riggs Dairy Express, Inc., 354 F.2d 661 (3d Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s decision with reference to appellant’s pretrial memorandum. Appellant also argues that part of the second of three different hospital records should have been allowed into evidence. That proposed evidence was cumulative as the trial court found. In any event in the light of plaintiff’s damage proofs which were in evidence and the $12,000. verdict in favor of the plaintiff, the harm, if any, to plaintiff was de minimis; certainly the court’s action was not reversible error.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s decision with reference to appellant’s pretrial memorandum. Appellant also argues that part of the second of three different hospital records should have been allowed into evidence. That proposed evidence was cumulative as the trial court found. In any event in the light of plaintiff’s damage proofs which were in evidence and the $12,000. verdict in favor of the plaintiff, the harm, if any, to plaintiff was de minimis; certainly the court’s action was not reversible error.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

354 F.2d 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lois-hemmerle-v-riggs-dairy-express-inc-ca3-1966.