Legal Opinion
Continental Nat. Bank v. Neville
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 8, 1923No. 3914PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The plaintiff in error argues at length that the evidence is insufficient' to sustain a verdict for any amount in favor of the defendant in error. It is not asserted that there was no evidence which, if credited by the jury, would support the verdict. No request was made in the court below that the jury be instructed to return a verdict for the plaintiff in error. It follows that this court cannot inquire into the question of the weight of the evidence. American Trading Co. v. North Alaska Salmon Co., 248 Fed. 665, 160 C. C. A. 565.
The court below…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brown v. DaughertyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Missouri · 1903
- Bates v. . First National Bank of BrockportNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Honig v. Pacific BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Armstrong v. JohnsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- American Trading Co. v. North Alaska Salmon Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dayton Rubber Mfg. Co. of Delaware v. SabraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- Hans Zimmerman v. Delos C. EmmonsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Ludwig v. Montana Bank and Trust Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1939