Legal Opinion
Smith v. Pollin
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided January 29, 1952No. 11198_1PublishedCited by 171 opinions
1Per curiam
Appellants’ motion is for leave to file in the District Court a motion to vacate the judgment of that court dated February 8, 1951. The text of the motion shows that in substance it is a motion for leave to file a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The motion raises a question as to proper procedure in such cases.
In criminal cases the procedure upon a motion such as this is now settled. The old rule, Rule 11(3), 292 U.S. 662, was that “the trial court may entertain the motion only on remand of the case by the appellate court for that purpose”. When the new…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rakes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Baruch v. Beech Aircraft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
- Harper Bros. v. KlawCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
3Cited by171 opinions
- Morris W. Gordon v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- United States v. Willie Decoster, Jr.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- International Harvester Co. v. RuckelshausCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Austin Joseph Ryan v. United States Lines CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- First National Bank of Salem, Ohio v. Harry D. HirschCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1976
166 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.