Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co.

Fifth Circuit

Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co.

184 F. 892, 107 C.C.A. 214, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3932

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 7, 1911

DocketNo. 2,117

StatusPublished

This text of 184 F. 892 (Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co., 184 F. 892, 107 C.C.A. 214, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3932 (5th Cir. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Where a writ of error is allowed, and citation duly issued and served, an informality in the bond, or in its approval, will not affect the appellate jurisdiction. See O’Reilly v. Edrington, 96 U. S. 724, 24 L. Ed. 659; Hudson v. Parker, 156 U. S. 287, 15 Sup. Ct. 450, 39 L. Ed. 424.

The assignments of error herein complain, first, of a refusal to direct a verdict for the plaintiff; and, second and third, of excerpts from the judge’s charge. From a consideration of the evidence and the judge’s full charge to the jury, given in the transcript, we conclude that the evidence made a case for the jury, and that the charge, taken as a whole and in the light of the evidence, was not incorrect or misleading, so as to constitute reversible error.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Where a writ of error is allowed, and citation duly issued and served, an informality in the bond, or in its approval, will not affect the appellate jurisdiction. See O’Reilly v. Edrington, 96 U. S. 724, 24 L. Ed. 659; Hudson v. Parker, 156 U. S. 287, 15 Sup. Ct. 450, 39 L. Ed. 424.

The assignments of error herein complain, first, of a refusal to direct a verdict for the plaintiff; and, second and third, of excerpts from the judge’s charge. From a consideration of the evidence and the judge’s full charge to the jury, given in the transcript, we conclude that the evidence made a case for the jury, and that the charge, taken as a whole and in the light of the evidence, was not incorrect or misleading, so as to constitute reversible error.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 F. 892, 107 C.C.A. 214, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smythe-v-new-orleans-land-co-ca5-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack