Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Bank of Commerce

HUTCHESON, Chief Judge.

When this case was here before on the Bank’s appeal from a directed verdict,1 it was decided as the law of the caste that the evidence presented a question for the jury. Here again, this time on Hartford’s appeal from a judgment on a verdict against it, it is quite clear that unless reversible error attending the trial is made to appear, the judgment must, on the authority of the former opinion, be affirmed. Recognizing that this is so, appellant puts forward and vigorously argues two specifications of error.2

The first is concerned with the admission of evidence that…