Legal Opinion

Taliaferro v. Carter

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided June 18, 1934No. 6117PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff in error sued defendants in error to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Defendants in error were duly summoned and appeared on the return day of the summons, but at their request a continuance was granted and the ease set for trial April 4, 1932. On that day they failed to appear and, without objection on the part of plaintiff in error, the case was continued to April 21. On that date defendants in error again faded to appear, and on motion, of plaintiff in error the case was set down for trial May 19,1932. On May 19th plaintiff in error…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. Bronson v. SchultenSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  3. Wetmore v. KarrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  4. Gibson v. WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  5. Hickman v. Fort ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1891

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Fishel v. KiteCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
  2. United States ex rel. Tungsten Reef Mines Co. v. IckesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
  3. Marvin's Credit, Inc. v. KitchingDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
  4. United States v. CoyDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1942
  5. Acker v. HerfurthCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API