Southern Railway Company v. H. W. Vaughn, D/B/A H. W. Vaughn and Company

Fifth Circuit

Southern Railway Company v. H. W. Vaughn, D/B/A H. W. Vaughn and Company

359 F.2d 424, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6472

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 15, 1966

Docket22566

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 359 F.2d 424 (Southern Railway Company v. H. W. Vaughn, D/B/A H. W. Vaughn and Company) 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

Southern Railway Company v. H. W. Vaughn, D/B/A H. W. Vaughn and Company, 359 F.2d 424, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6472 (5th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The judgment is affirmed.

No error is shown to have been committed by the trial court as to which the appellant complied with the requirements of Rule 46, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 1 As to the complaint that *425 testimony was adduced with respect to efforts to make a settlement of the claim, the trial court sustained appellant’s objection and the only other testimony relating to the matter was adduced by counsel for the appellant on cross examination. Appellant can not now sue-cessfully attack the action of the trial court in admitting such evidence when adduced on its behalf.

The trial court gave a proper charge to the jury on the measure of damages and no exception was taken to other elements of the charge, which appellant now seeks to attack as erroneous.

1

. Rule 46, F.R.Civ.P.:

“[F]or all purposes for which an exception has heretofore been necessary it is sufficient that a party, at the time the ruling or order of the court is made or sought, makes known to the court the action which he desires the court to take or his objection to the action of the court and his grounds therefor ^

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

PER CURIAM:

The judgment is affirmed.

No error is shown to have been committed by the trial court as to which the appellant complied with the requirements of Rule 46, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 1 As to the complaint that *425 testimony was adduced with respect to efforts to make a settlement of the claim, the trial court sustained appellant’s objection and the only other testimony relating to the matter was adduced by counsel for the appellant on cross examination. Appellant can not now sue-cessfully attack the action of the trial court in admitting such evidence when adduced on its behalf.

The trial court gave a proper charge to the jury on the measure of damages and no exception was taken to other elements of the charge, which appellant now seeks to attack as erroneous.

1

. Rule 46, F.R.Civ.P.:

“[F]or all purposes for which an exception has heretofore been necessary it is sufficient that a party, at the time the ruling or order of the court is made or sought, makes known to the court the action which he desires the court to take or his objection to the action of the court and his grounds therefor ^

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

359 F.2d 424, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-company-v-h-w-vaughn-dba-h-w-vaughn-and-company-ca5-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack