Southern Pacific Co. v. Melvin

Fifth Circuit

Southern Pacific Co. v. Melvin

157 F. 1005, 85 C.C.A. 679, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 3963

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 11, 1908·No. No. 1,711·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plea of privilege, based on facts to be proved, was voluntarily submitted to the judge a quo without the intervention of a jury. As there was no agreed statement of facts, nor any special finding of facts, we must accept the judge’s findings on the said plea as conclusive. Lehnen v. Dickson, 148 U. S. 71, 13 Sup. Ct 481, 37 L. Ed. 373. On the plea of lis pen-dens, and on the evidence submitted, we concur in the ruling of the trial judge. In the trial of the main case we find no 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.

The plea of privilege, based on facts to be proved, was voluntarily submitted to the judge a quo without the intervention of a jury. As there was no agreed statement of facts, nor any special finding of facts, we must accept the judge’s findings on the said plea as conclusive. Lehnen v. Dickson, 148 U. S. 71, 13 Sup. Ct 481, 37 L. Ed. 373. On the plea of lis pen-dens, and on the evidence submitted, we concur in the ruling of the trial judge. In the trial of the main case we find no reversible error. The judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Southern Pacific Co. v. Melvin, 157 F. 1005, 85 C.C.A. 679, 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 3963 (5th Cir. 1908).

Pincite

157 F. 1005 (Southern Pacific Co. v. Melvin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related