Rosso & Mastracco, Inc. v. Sam Finley, Inc.

Fourth Circuit

Rosso & Mastracco, Inc. v. Sam Finley, Inc.

344 F.2d 96, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6177

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 18, 1965

Docket9762_1

StatusPublished

This text of 344 F.2d 96 (Rosso & Mastracco, Inc. v. Sam Finley, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rosso & Mastracco, Inc. v. Sam Finley, Inc., 344 F.2d 96, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6177 (4th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellee, plaintiff below, obtained a money judgment against the defendant for damages assertedly flowing from defendant’s breach of its contractual undertaking to grade, drain, fill and pave plaintiff’s parking lot to be used in connection with plaintiff’s supermarket then under construction. Judgment was entered on the general verdict of a jury returned after a trial which extended over a period of several days.

Upon careful examination of the trial record, and upon consideration of the briefs and arguments of counsel, we conclude that the issues were fairly presented to the jury for determination, there was no error in the proceedings and the verdict and judgment should not be disturbed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The appellee, plaintiff below, obtained a money judgment against the defendant for damages assertedly flowing from defendant’s breach of its contractual undertaking to grade, drain, fill and pave plaintiff’s parking lot to be used in connection with plaintiff’s supermarket then under construction. Judgment was entered on the general verdict of a jury returned after a trial which extended over a period of several days.

Upon careful examination of the trial record, and upon consideration of the briefs and arguments of counsel, we conclude that the issues were fairly presented to the jury for determination, there was no error in the proceedings and the verdict and judgment should not be disturbed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 F.2d 96, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 6177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosso-mastracco-inc-v-sam-finley-inc-ca4-1965.