The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, a Corporation v. Carl N. Peigh, Buel C. Griffin and Omar A. Safly

D.C. Circuit

The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, a Corporation v. Carl N. Peigh, Buel C. Griffin and Omar A. Safly

219 F.2d 764, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 83

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided February 17, 1955·No. 12225_1·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from a judgment for the plaintiff, entered on a jury’s verdict, in a suit for personal injuries. We reversed a former judgment for the defendant. Peigh v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 92 U.S.App.D.C. 198, 204 F.2d 391. The defendant’s contentions concern negligence, contributory negligence, proximate cause, and the admission and exclusion of evidence. We find no error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.

WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judge, dissents.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from a judgment for the plaintiff, entered on a jury’s verdict, in a suit for personal injuries. We reversed a former judgment for the defendant. Peigh v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 92 U.S.App.D.C. 198, 204 F.2d 391. The defendant’s contentions concern negligence, contributory negligence, proximate cause, and the admission and exclusion of evidence. We find no error affecting substantial rights.

Affirmed.

WILBUR K. MILLER, Circuit Judge, dissents.

The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, a Corporation v. Carl N. Peigh, Buel C. Griffin and Omar A. Safly, 219 F.2d 764, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 83 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Pincite

219 F.2d 764 (The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, a Corporation v. Carl N. Peigh, Buel C. Griffin and Omar A. Safly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related