Manuel Braunstein, T/a Power Produce Company v. Hunter Smith

D.C. Circuit

Manuel Braunstein, T/a Power Produce Company v. Hunter Smith

261 F.2d 766, 104 U.S. App. D.C. 300

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided November 26, 1958·No. 14434·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appeal by defendant is from a .judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs for damages due to injuries suffered in an automobile collision. The question is essentially whether it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to instruct the jury, as requested, with respect to a certain minor aspect of the evidence. In the context of the case as a whole we think the failure so to instruct did not constitute reversible error.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appeal by defendant is from a .judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs for damages due to injuries suffered in an automobile collision. The question is essentially whether it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to instruct the jury, as requested, with respect to a certain minor aspect of the evidence. In the context of the case as a whole we think the failure so to instruct did not constitute reversible error.

Affirmed.

Manuel Braunstein, T/a Power Produce Company v. Hunter Smith, 261 F.2d 766, 104 U.S. App. D.C. 300 (D.C. Cir. 1958).

Pincite

261 F.2d 766 (Manuel Braunstein, T/a Power Produce Company v. Hunter Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related