Casey-Hedges Co. v. Oliphant
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Eastern District of Tennessee; Edward T. Sanford, Judge. Action by J. R. Oliphant against the Casey-Hedges Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
WARRINGTON, Circuit Judge.
Oliphant recovered a verdict and judgment against the company for personal injuries suffered while in its employ. At the close of Oliphant’s evidence, which was all that was offered, the company moved that a verdict be directed in its favor. The motion was overruled, exception reserved, and the only assignment presented here is that “the court erred in overruling the motion * * * to direct tire jury to render a verdict for the defendant.”
[1, 2] 1. Motion is made to dismiss the writ of error for the reason that the assignment is insufficient under rule 11 (224 Fed.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. BennettCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
- Felton v. GirardyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Louisville & N. R. v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Louisville & N. R. v. WomackCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- Atchison, T. & S. F. R. v. MeyersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1896
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- New Ætna Portland Cement Co. v. HattCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
- The State of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1936
- Kennedy Lumber Co. v. RickbornCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1930
- Casey-Hedges Co. v. Southwestern Surety Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1917
- Meers v. ChildersCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.