Tridell v. Munhall
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania
Rule for a New Trial. Also Rule for Judgment Non Obstante Veredicto on Reserved Point.
1Opinion of the Court
ARCHBALD, District Judge.*
According to the Pennsylvania practice, it is largely for the trial judge to say what papers shall go out with the jury, and the sending out of a declaration, and of a mechanic’s claim with a bill of particulars attached, which amounts to the same thing, have been expressly sanctioned. Hall v. Rupley, 10 Pa. 231; Odd Fellows Hall v. Masser, 24 Pa. 507, 64 Am. Dec. 675. This may not be controlling on the federal courts, but it is at least suggestive, particularly as it is sustained by the general practice. Thus, in Shulse v. McWilliams, 104 Ind. 512, 3 N. E. 243, it…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Shepherd v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Kallenbach v. DickinsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Hanson v. TowleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Carroll v. ForsythIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- Bluedorn v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Muncie & Portland Traction Co. v. HallIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
- Romer v. BaldwinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962