Barnes & Tucker Coal Co. v. Vozar
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania; W. H. Seward Thomson, Judge. Action at law by Victoria Vozar against the Barnes & Tucker Coal Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
McPHERSON, Circuit Judge.
[1] At the close of the judge’s charge to the jury, counsel for the defendant company asked for, and was allowed, “a general exception to the charge, and also * * * to the answers to such of defendant’s points as were not unqualifiedly affirmed.” The trial ended on February 20, 1915, but no exceptions to the charge were specified until May 29, when the court ordered them to be “filed of record in this cause nunc pro tunc, as if presented in open court on the trial of this cause immediately after the court’s charge and before the jury retired.” The first seven assign*26men…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gibson v. Bessemer & Lake Erie RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Wolcutt v. Erie Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Bogdanovicz v. Susquehanna Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Watson v. Monongahela River Consolidated Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Shade v. LlewellynSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Graboyes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1918
- Magna Oil & Refining Co. v. White Star Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1922
- Maynard v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1918
- Kitrell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935