Legal Opinion
Coberth v. Wilson
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 6, 1933No. 6854PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SAWTELLE, Circuit Judge.
■ Appellant seeks the reversal of the judgment for error in denying a motion for a directed verdict made at the close of the evidence, upon the ground that the evidence-fails to show any act of negligence or malpractice on his part. Appellee moves to-strike out the bill of exceptions, on the.ground that it is not in condensed, narrative form as required by rule 10 of the rules of practice of this court, which requirement has been adjudicated by this court in the eases of McDonald v. Harding, 57 F.(2d) 119 ; Hursh v. Killits, 58 F.(2d) 903; and Yangtsze Rapid S. S. Co.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Krauss Brothers Lumber Co. v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Yangtsze Rapid S. S. Co. v. Deutsch-Asiatische BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
- Hursh v. KillitsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
- McDonald v. HardingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
- Oregon-American Lumber Co. v. SimpsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
3Cited by3 opinions
- Metzler v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- E. K. Wood Lumber Co. v. AndersenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Allen Gasoline Co. v. Franklin Fire Ins. Co. of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933