Samuel W. Peck Co. v. Rose

Second Circuit

Samuel W. Peck Co. v. Rose

186 F. 1023, 108 C.C.A. 664, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4185

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 17, 1911

DocketNo. 276

StatusPublished

This text of 186 F. 1023 (Samuel W. Peck Co. v. Rose) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Samuel W. Peck Co. v. Rose, 186 F. 1023, 108 C.C.A. 664, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4185 (2d Cir. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

An examination of the bill of exceptions shows that certain papers, marked “Exhibit MM” wore received in evidence. The record does not contain these exhibits. We think that the record is incomplete without them, and that they should be supplied. If counsel cannot agree upon copies thereof, the trial judge should certify to correct copies of the papers introduced at the trial and marked “Exhibit MM,” which copies should be returned to the clerk of this court and printed by him as part of the record.

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

PER CURIAM.

An examination of the bill of exceptions shows that certain papers, marked “Exhibit MM” wore received in evidence. The record does not contain these exhibits. We think that the record is incomplete without them, and that they should be supplied. If counsel cannot agree upon copies thereof, the trial judge should certify to correct copies of the papers introduced at the trial and marked “Exhibit MM,” which copies should be returned to the clerk of this court and printed by him as part of the record.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 F. 1023, 108 C.C.A. 664, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samuel-w-peck-co-v-rose-ca2-1911.