Courts Commons^™

Rules For Civil Procedure In The United States District Courts: Appellate Procedure, Burke G. Slaymaker

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rules For Civil Procedure In The United States District Courts: Pre-Trial Procedure, Albert H. Cole

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Rules For Civil Procedure In The United States District Courts: Trial Procedure, Arthur L. Gilliom

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Jurors - Disqualification For Relationship To Parties - Who Are Parties, James H. Kilbourne

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was convicted of grand larceny. His motion for a new trial on the ground that one of the jurors was disqualified for implied bias because she was the mother of a deputy prosecuting attorney of the county was denied. Defendant appealed. Held, there was no error in denying the motion, for the juror was not disqualified. State v. Peterson, 190 Wash. 668, 70 P. (2d) 306 (1937).

The New Federal Rules And Indiana Procedure (Part Ii), Bernard C. Gavit

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Equity - Contempt - Duration Of Imprisonment, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, a trustee, refused to comply with a court order to turn over certain property to a receiver appointed by the court. She also refused to answer proper questions in a proceeding before a master. She was committed for contempt on January 5, 1934, to be held in jail till she complied with the court order and answered the questions. Her petition for release in July, 1937, was denied. Held, petition properly denied. Tegtmeyer v. Tegtmeyer, (Ill. App. 1937) 11 N. E. (2d) 657.

Jury - False Or Misleading Answers On Voir Dire As Grounds For A New Trial, James H. Kilbourne

Michigan Law Review

Defendant, a striking employee, was convicted of breach of the peace arising out of an assault on non-striking employees. Immediately preceding his trial the jurors had been interrogated on voir dire in a similar case. Counsel for defendant stated he would rely in part on that examination. In it the jurors had been asked whether they had either friends or relatives working at the strike-bound plant. Juror A failed to disclose that his brother was a non-striking employee, though he admitted his niece was. Juror B failed to disclose that a friend who had previously lived with him for a …

The Mind Of The Juror, Stephen Ailes

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts - Procedure For Determining Jurisdiction Ab Facto - Burden Of Pleading And Proof, Richard B. Maxwell

Michigan Law Review

Since the beginning of our government it has been recognized that the federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. At an early date it was decided that because of this the plaintiff must state in his complaint the facts upon which the jurisdiction depended. The reason given in support of this rule, which is still the unquestioned law, is that there is no presumption of jurisdiction in courts which have only limited jurisdiction, but it is presumed not to exist unless its existence be shown upon the record. When the plaintiff sustained his burden of pleading the jurisdictional facts, his …

Judgments - Default Judgments Rendered Without Jurisdiction - Validating Effect Of A Subsequent General Appearance, Richard B. Maxwell

Michigan Law Review

The effect of a general appearance by the defendant following a default judgment rendered without jurisdiction over the person of the defendant has been again raised by the recent Wisconsin case of Schwantz v. Morris. In this case the original judgment was invalid for lack of jurisdiction over the defendants, but the Supreme Court of Wisconsin held, that by joining non-jurisdictional grounds with jurisdictional grounds in a motion to set the judgment aside, the defendants had waived any defects in or objections to the jurisdiction of the court and that this waiver related back to the time of the …

The Doctrine Of Stare Decisis In British Courts Of Last Resort, John A. Fairlie

Michigan Law Review

The House of Lords and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council are both British courts of last resort. The House of Lords is the final court for the United Kingdom and reviews cases from the English Court of Appeals and equivalent courts of Scotland and Northern Ireland; the Judicial Committee hears appeals of cases from the colonies and dominions and ecclesiastical cases.

Readers of Professor Gray's lectures on The Nature and Sources of the Law are aware of the distinction he notes between the attitude of the British House of Lords, on the one hand, and the Judicial Committee …

Appeal And Error-Appealable Interest Of Bidder At Judicial Sale, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

The receiver of a bank effected a compromise settlement with the maker of a second mortgage note of $2100, agreeing to sell him the note for $500. Notice of hearing to confirm this sale was published. Prior to the confirmation, appellant, who was the holder of the first mortgage, offered to pay the receiver $600 for the note. The court confirmed the sale to the maker over appellant's objection made at the hearing. Held, that the appellant was not an aggrieved party and had no appealable interest. Dean v. Clapp, (Iowa 1936) 268 N. W. 56.

The Problem Of Jury Instructions, Haymond Maxwell

West Virginia Law Review

The question of instructions to juries is a perennial problem with practitioners and judges. Having in mind the seriousness of this subject, the Judicial Council of West Virginia, some months ago, formulated a program for thorough investigation and consideration of the instructions enigma. In response to the council's request that it render assistance in the matter, the faculty of the College of Law of West Virginia University caused to be made a synopsis of all the state statutes dealing with instructions. Only a few of the states have no such statutes. Virginia is among that small number. Though I am …

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 …

Rules Of Practice In The Trial Courts Of Record Of West Virginia

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Constitutional Law - Power Of State Legislature To Provide For Jury Trial In Proceedings For Contempt Of Court

Michigan Law Review

The defendants, an independent union, and members thereof, were cited for contempt before a court of common pleas for the violation of an in junction restraining them from interfering with the operation of the plaintiff's mines. The alleged contumacious acts took place some ten miles from the court house and consisted of gathering about automobiles containing employees of the plaintiff company, throwing stones at them, breaking windows of the cars, and injuring some of the occupants. The contempt proceedings arose on petition of the company and were before the same judge who granted the injunction. The defendants claimed that under …

Practice And Procedure-Seventh Amendment-Power Of Federal Court To Increase Inadequate Verdict

Michigan Law Review

A jury in a federal court awarded the plaintiff $500 in a personal injury action; he moved for a new trial on the ground of inadequate damages. Having obtained consent of defendant to entry of judgment for $1500, the trial judge denied the motion. Plaintiff appealed. Held, this procedure was a violation of the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution; a new trial must be granted. Dimick v. Schiedt, (U. S. 1935) 55 Sup. Ct. 296.

Verdict--Juror's Assent--What Constitutes, Paul D. Farr

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Practice And Procedure - Power Of The Court To Increase Inadequate Verdict

Michigan Law Review

With the development of the remittitur in the case of excessive verdicts, one would naturally expect the development of an analogous device for cases wherein the verdicts are inadequate. When the plaintiff moves for a new trial because of an inadequate verdict, a denial of the motion on the condition that the defendant agree to a certain increase in the verdict is perfectly analogous to the remittitur in form. But this device has not received the same wide acceptance as its counterpart. In cases in which the plaintiff has appealed this device has been condemned, while it has been approved …

Federal Practice -Appeal And Error - Review Of Denial Of Motion For New Trial

Michigan Law Review

The federal appellate courts have, in a great many decisions, refused to review the denial of a motion for a new trial made in a lower federal court. The very recent case of Fairmount Glass Works v. Cub Fork Coal Co. once again presents the problem, and Justice Brandeis, writing the majority opinion, follows the prior holdings. In this very excellent opinion the learned Justice presents the reasons for the result generally reached, and enumerates some of the exceptions in a manner which should tend to clarify much of the doubt which has existed in this field of appellate jurisdiction.

New Rules Of The Supreme Court, Bernard C. Gavit

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Practice - Appeal And Error - Necessity For Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law In Interlocutory Proceedings

Michigan Law Review

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin issued a temporary order reducing telephone rates, setting forth its reasons and the facts in an elaborate opinion. A temporary restraining order was issued by a federal district court, which was followed by an application for an interlocutory injunction. A hearing on this application was held before three judges who granted an injunction on the same day upon the giving of a bond. Meanwhile the temporary restraining order continued in force. No opinion was rendered other than a general statement in the decree that the Commission's order "would result in the confiscation of the …

Federal Practice - Appeal And Error - Single Appeal From State Court Involving Consolidated Suits

Michigan Law Review

Three national banks brought separate suits in a state court against the same defendants to annul a tax assessment, claiming that the act authorizing such assessment violated a federal statute. The suits were consolidated for the trial of this main issue but a separate judgment was rendered in favor of each bank. The defendants took three separate appeals to the state supreme court, but only one transcript was sent up and the appeals were docketed and argued as one case. In a single opinion the court annulled the judgments appealed from. The plaintiffs took a single appeal to the Supreme …

Federal Practice - Appeal And Error - Dismissal Of Counterclaim Because Of Improper Venue Appealable As Interlocutory Order Denying Injunction

Michigan Law Review

To plaintiffs' suit for patent infringement defendants counterclaimed upon an unrelated patent asking for an injunction and an accounting. Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue was sustained by the district court. Defendants appealed and plaintiffs moved to dismiss on the ground that dismissal of a counterclaim was not a refusal of an injunction and therefore not appealable under Sec. 129, Judicial Code. The circuit court of appeals allowed the appeal and this decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court. General Electric Co. et al. v. Marvel Rare Metals Co. et al., 287 U.S. 430, 53 …

Equity- Contempts - Purgation By Sworn Answer - Doctrine Of Variance

Michigan Law Review

At the suit of X Traction Company defendants had been enjoined from operating busses along streets upon which plaintiff operated its cars. The latter .filed an information in the name of the State charging the defendants with wilful violation of the restraining order, and moved for an attachment for contempt, and for the infliction of "such penalties as are or may be necessary to compel observance." Defendants filed motions to discharge, and also answers for the purpose of purging themselves of the alleged contempt. Upon trial, at which evidence was received, the court found defendants guilty, and levied fines. Defendants …

Equity-Intervention

Michigan Law Review

A Kansas statute forbids the operation of theatres on Sunday. Appellee obtained an interlocutory injunction restraining "the Attorney General of the State of Kansas, and his subordinates . . . and every other person acting or attempting to act for said defendants" from enforcing the statute. Following this temporary injunction the appellee continued to operate his theatres on Sunday, and when the municipal authorities of Winfield and Eldorado threatened to enforce municipal ordinances prohibiting Sunday shows, the appellee served them with copies of the preliminary order against the attorney general, and warned them that contempt proceedings would be instituted if …

Procedure Under The Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, Bernard C. Gavit

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Practice And Procedure - Conditional Judgments At Law - Validity And Advantages

Michigan Law Review

Some modern courts have asserted and many lawyers have assumed that in common law actions a court can not render a judgment conditional in form. It is argued that the court is without jurisdiction so to decide a case, and that in any event the common law has never recognized such a form of judgment as valid. The first point is not so difficult to disprove, and the second, so far as actual decision is concerned, is clearly incorrect." In several early cases common law courts were willing not only to stay execution of judgments until conditions were performed, but …

Practice And Procedure - Declaratory Judgments In The Federal Courts

Michigan Law Review

The declaratory judgment by that name is comparatively new in legal procedure in this country. But it is in reality simply an extension of an old process. The power to declare the rights of the parties is inherent in courts of equity and has been exercised since ancient times in action to quiet title, to declare marriages valid or void, to annul divorces, to declare legitimacy or illegitimacy or determine heirship, to construe wills and trusts, and in other actions. A suit for a declaratory judgment in no wise differs from other suits save in the single respect of the …