Legal Opinion

Deemer v. United Fruit Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 3, 1936No. 19340PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MARIS, District Judge.

This was an action at law in which the defendant at the trial submitted a point for binding instructions. The trial judge, not being prepared to affirm the point, reserved it and submitted the case to the jury, which brought in a verdict for the plaintiff subject to the point of law reserved. Subsequently, after argument the court directed judgment to be entered for the defendant upon the point of law reserved. The testimony was taken down stenographically at the trial by a stenographer employed by the parties, and the plaintiff now raises the question whether it was not…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Gasoline Products Co. v. Champlin Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Slocum v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  3. Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. RedmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Herron v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
  5. Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad v. HawthorneSupreme Court of the United States · 1892

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cohen v. Globe Indemnity Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API