The Railway Supply & Mfg. Co. v. Shawnee-Penn Mfg. Co., Inc.

Third Circuit

The Railway Supply & Mfg. Co. v. Shawnee-Penn Mfg. Co., Inc.

255 F.2d 686, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4250

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedJune 13, 1958

Docket12559

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 F.2d 686 (The Railway Supply & Mfg. Co. v. Shawnee-Penn Mfg. Co., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

The Railway Supply & Mfg. Co. v. Shawnee-Penn Mfg. Co., Inc., 255 F.2d 686, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4250 (3d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant from a final judgment entered on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in a civil action for damages for breach of a contract for the purchase of goods by the defendant from the plaintiff. Motions for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v. were denied. The defendant’s principal complaint on this appeal is that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The weight of the evidence was for the jury to determine, however, and we find no abuse of discretion on the part of the district court in refusing a new trial on this ground. The defendant also asserts that there were errors in the admission of evidence and in the charge to the jury. We have considered all these contentions but find them so insubstantial as not to require discussion here.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant from a final judgment entered on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in a civil action for damages for breach of a contract for the purchase of goods by the defendant from the plaintiff. Motions for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v. were denied. The defendant’s principal complaint on this appeal is that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The weight of the evidence was for the jury to determine, however, and we find no abuse of discretion on the part of the district court in refusing a new trial on this ground. The defendant also asserts that there were errors in the admission of evidence and in the charge to the jury. We have considered all these contentions but find them so insubstantial as not to require discussion here.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 F.2d 686, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-railway-supply-mfg-co-v-shawnee-penn-mfg-co-inc-ca3-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack