Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co.

184 F. 892, 107 C.C.A. 214, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3932
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 7, 1911·No. No. 2,117·Published

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

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

184 F. 892 (Smythe v. New Orleans Land Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

O'Reilly v. Edrington
96 U.S. 724 (Supreme Court, 1878)
Hudson v. Parker
156 U.S. 277 (Supreme Court, 1895)