McGuigan v. Hennesy

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

McGuigan v. Hennesy

138 F. 1007, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4657

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York·Decided June 9, 1905·Published

Opinion

WALLACE, Circuit Judge.

I have carefully considered the brief of counsel for the plaintiff, and have reconsidered the correctness of my ruling upon the trial directing a verdict for the defendant. I am satisfied that the direction was correct, and that upon the case presented to the jury the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. Judgment is accordingly ordered for the defendant, pursuant to the verdict of the jury.

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

WALLACE, Circuit Judge.

I have carefully considered the brief of counsel for the plaintiff, and have reconsidered the correctness of my ruling upon the trial directing a verdict for the defendant. I am satisfied that the direction was correct, and that upon the case presented to the jury the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. Judgment is accordingly ordered for the defendant, pursuant to the verdict of the jury.

McGuigan v. Hennesy, 138 F. 1007, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4657 (circtsdny 1905).

Pincite

138 F. 1007 (McGuigan v. Hennesy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.