Mrs. Edna Latil Nichols v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company
Opinion
Appellant having failed to object to the argument now contended to having been prejudicial, and no plain error or abdication of function by the District Judge appearing, the judgment appealed from is affirmed. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Reid, 5th Cir., 1935, 76 F.2d 30; Louisiana & Arkansas Ry. Co. v. Johnson, 5th Cir., 1954, 214 F.2d 290, cert. den. 1954, 348 U.S. 875, 75 S.Ct. 111, 99 L.Ed. 688; Ford v. United Gas Corp., 5th Cir., 1958, 254 F.2d 817, cert. den. 358 U.S. 824, 79 S.Ct. 40, 3 L.Ed.2d 64.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
310 F.2d 704 (Mrs. Edna Latil Nichols v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.