Reichard v. Wells

D.C. Circuit

Reichard v. Wells

178 F.2d 710, 85 U.S. App. D.C. 367, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2566

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedOctober 24, 1949

Docket9983_1

StatusPublished

This text of 178 F.2d 710 (Reichard v. Wells) 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.

Bluebook

Reichard v. Wells, 178 F.2d 710, 85 U.S. App. D.C. 367, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2566 (D.C. Cir. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has recovered judgment against appellant for false arrest and malicious prosecution. Though the evidence is conflicting and by no means conclusive we think it sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. We find no merit in appellant’s objection to the court’s charge. Since appellant did not object to the court’s definition of malice we do not consider whether it was correct.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has recovered judgment against appellant for false arrest and malicious prosecution. Though the evidence is conflicting and by no means conclusive we think it sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. We find no merit in appellant’s objection to the court’s charge. Since appellant did not object to the court’s definition of malice we do not consider whether it was correct.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 F.2d 710, 85 U.S. App. D.C. 367, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reichard-v-wells-cadc-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack