R. W. Claxton, Inc. v. Schaff
This text of 169 F.2d 303 (R. W. Claxton, Inc. v. Schaff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
In Schaff v. Claxton, Inc., 79 U.S.App.D.C. 207, 208, 144 F.2d 532, 533, we said: “the evidence in the present case should have been submitted to the jury with instructions to find for the plaintiffs if they found that the defendant’s driver was negligent in leaving the car unlocked and that this negligence was a proximate cause of the accident. * * * The case will therefore be remanded for a new trial.” The judgment now here on appeal was upon a new trial in which the law stated in that opinion was followed. The judgment is therefore affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
169 F.2d 303, 83 U.S. App. D.C. 271, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-w-claxton-inc-v-schaff-cadc-1948.