Legal Opinion
Wilson v. Corning Glass Works
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 15, 1952No. 12975PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DENMAN, Chief Judge.
This appeal is from a judgment that the plaintiff Wilson, a citizen of California, •take nothing in her negligence action to recover against defendant, Corning Glass Works, a New York corporation, for personal injuries arising from the sudden breaking of a glass dish manufactured by the defendant.
A. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for a trial by jury, made subsequent to her failure to demand a jury within the 30 days from the filing of her complaint to 10 days after the service of defendants answer as required by Rule-38,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Capital Traction Co. v. HofSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Somerville's Executors v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Duignan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Du Bois Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Billy Merritt v. Gordon H. FaulknerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Fred Engelhardt, D/B/A Engelhardt's Camera Store v. Bell & Howell Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
- Houston v. LLOYD'S CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE CORPORATIONCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- In Re PrevinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1953
- Carlile v. Continental Oil CompanyNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1970
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.