HARTMAN GOLDSMITH & CO. v. FIDELITY & DEPOSIT CO.

No. 297.

33 F.2d 89 (1929)

HARTMAN GOLDSMITH & CO., Inc., v. FIDELITY & DEPOSIT CO. OF MARYLAND.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 20, 1929.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Fred Boehm, of New York City (Daniel Levy, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Barnes, Avery & Whiting, of New York City (Earl B. Barnes, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before MANTON, L. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.


CHASE, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).

The plaintiff insists that the motions made at the close of the evidence were such that no issue of fact was left for the consideration of the jury; that by taking an exception to the adverse direction of a verdict, without specifically asking to go to the jury on any question of fact, the defendant waived its right to have the case submitted; and that the ruling must stand, if there was any evidence to support...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases