United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. City of Pensacola

Fifth Circuit

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. City of Pensacola

277 F. 429, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1743

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 10, 1922

DocketNo. 3705

StatusPublished

This text of 277 F. 429 (United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. City of Pensacola) 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

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. City of Pensacola, 277 F. 429, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1743 (5th Cir. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record does not show that any exception was reserved to the court’s charge to the jury, or to its refusal to give requested charges. This being so, the judgment is not subject to be reversed because of any of those rulings. The assignment of errors based upon rulings of the court on objections to evidence does not conform to the requirement of rule 11 of this court (150 Fed. xxvii, 79 C. C. A. xxvii) that such assignment “shall quote the full substance of the evidence admitted or rejected.” However, those rulings have been considered. In our Opinion, none of them involved reversible error.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The record does not show that any exception was reserved to the court’s charge to the jury, or to its refusal to give requested charges. This being so, the judgment is not subject to be reversed because of any of those rulings. The assignment of errors based upon rulings of the court on objections to evidence does not conform to the requirement of rule 11 of this court (150 Fed. xxvii, 79 C. C. A. xxvii) that such assignment “shall quote the full substance of the evidence admitted or rejected.” However, those rulings have been considered. In our Opinion, none of them involved reversible error.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 F. 429, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-fidelity-guaranty-co-v-city-of-pensacola-ca5-1922.