Russell v. Texas Transport & Terminal Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtSwan, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The defendant’s brief makes a very different case from that above stated. It asserts that no negotiations for settlement were pending in April, 1925, but that the ease was then stricken from the trial calendar because the plaintiff was not ready to proceed; that the case was again reached for trial in September, 1927, and was again marked off because the plaintiff failed to answer; and that on each occasion the defendant had gone to the expense of being ready for trial. Were such facts embodied in the record before us, it would be difficult to find any…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Seymour v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Mladinich v. LivingstonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
- Silverman v. BaruthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. WhitmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Graham v. AckleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- City of Jefferson v. Capital City Oil CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956