Legal Opinion
Second Nat. Bank of Allegheny v. Lash Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 13, 1924No. 3105PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge.
At the trial the court applied the rule of the McCarthy case. This now familiar rule, announced by the Supreme Court in Railway Co. v. McCarthy, 96 U. S. 258, 267, 24 L. Ed. 693, approved in Davis v. Wakelee, 156 U. S. 680, 690, 15 Sup. Ct. 555, 559, 39 L. Ed. 578; and followed by federal courts and many state courts, provides that:
“Where a party gives a reason for his conduct and decision touching anything involved in a controversy, he cannot, after litigation has begun, change his ground, and put his conduct upon another and a different consideration.”
*372Viewing this…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Davis v. WakeleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Shaw v. SpencerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Brink v. . Hanover Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Littlejohn v. . ShawNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Liverpool London Globe Ins. Co. v. McCreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Warner Co. v. MacMullenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- City and County of Denver v. Denver Tramway CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1927
- Ahto Walter, in No. 74-1343 v. Netherlands Mead N. v. (A Netherlands Antilles Corp.), in No. 74-1342, and W. M. O'NeilCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Cummings v. Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1930
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.