Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Nebraska (2)
- Automobile accidents (1)
- Bergandahl v. Rabeler (1)
- Causes of action (1)
- Chandler & Price v. Brandtjen & Kluge Inc. (1)
-
- Collision (1)
- Creditor classes (1)
- Federal equity rule 30 (1)
- Federal equity rule 37 (1)
- Fraud (1)
- Freeman Company (1)
- In re Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co. (1)
- Inconsistent remedies (1)
- Judicial commentary (1)
- Keezer v. State (1)
- Liquor laws (1)
- Loans (1)
- McCartney v. State (1)
- New York (1)
- Overcomplication (1)
- Preuit v. People (1)
- Satterwhite v. Harriman Nat. Bank & Trust Co. (1)
- Special masters (1)
- Stockholder voting (1)
- Underliers (1)
- Unfair burdens (1)
- Voir dire examinations (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Jury-Voir Dire-Actions For Negligence-Asking As To Interest In An Insurance Company, Michigan Law Review
Jury-Voir Dire-Actions For Negligence-Asking As To Interest In An Insurance Company, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
During the trial for injuries received in an automobile collision the plaintiff's attorney asked each prospective juror as to whether or not he owned stock in a named insurance company, or held a policy with it, or was an agent for it, and other questions as to whether or not the interest of an insurance company in the action would affect his decisions in the case. The company was not in fact a party to the action. The defendant assigned as error that such questions caused the jury to believe that the defendant carried insurance against loss from damages such …
Witnesses - Instruction As To Credibility Of Police Officers And Paid Detectives, Theodore R. Vogt
Witnesses - Instruction As To Credibility Of Police Officers And Paid Detectives, Theodore R. Vogt
Michigan Law Review
Defendant was convicted of violating the liquor laws. He complained of the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury that greater care should be used in weighing the evidence of police officers than that of other witnesses. Held, such an instruction was properly refused because the witnesses were regular members of the city police force. McCartney v. State, 129 Neb. 716, 262 N. W. 679 (1935).
Election Of Remedies - As Between Conversion And Replevin - Measure Of Recovery
Election Of Remedies - As Between Conversion And Replevin - Measure Of Recovery
Michigan Law Review
Through fraud, defendant received from plaintiff certain shares of stock together with other securities to secure a loan of $300,000 to the plaintiff. Defendant wrongfully hypothecated this stock. Plaintiff, after learning of the conversion, sued for the specific stock in replevin. During the course of the action he changed his demand to one in damages for conversion. The court held that plaintiff may not change the theory of his cause of action from replevin to conversion. Satterwhite v. Harriman Nat. Bank & Trust Co., (D. C. N. Y. 1935) 13 F. Supp. 493.
Bankruptcy - Reorganization Under Section 77 B - Determination Of Amount Of Claims For Purpose Of Voting On Approval Of Reorganization Plan
Michigan Law Review
In proceedings under Section 77 B of the Bankruptcy Act for the reorganization of the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company, a special master was appointed by the court, to ascertain and classify the creditors. Interested parties petitioned the court to instruct the master to require the "underliers," the class of creditors composed of the former owners of the various car lines taken over by the debtor Transit Company, to produce their books and papers to establish the fair amount of their claims, asserting that their properties were acquired by the debtor at grossly inflated prices; that their real value did not …
Federal Practice-Counterclaim By Lntervenors
Federal Practice-Counterclaim By Lntervenors
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff sued Freeman Company for infringing a patent by selling a certain patented device. The manufacturer of the device, and vendor of Freeman Company, obtained leave to intervene as a defendant under federal equity rule 37, and thereupon filed a counterclaim against the plaintiff for alleged infringement of other patents, claiming the right to do so as a "defendant" under federal equity rule 30. The plaintiff moved to dismiss the counterclaim. The motion was granted by the district court and affirmed on appeal by the circuit court. On certiorari the United States Supreme Court held that "defendant" under equity rule …