STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
EDWARD THOMAS SUBERS; STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED V. JOHN HANIGAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HANIGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, WALTER HINKLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HINKLE EXCAVATION COMPANY AND ROBERT R. TYLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE ROBERT R. TYLER AND CO. AND JOHN MCSHAIN, INC. (THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF) V. WILLIAM H. WALTERS & SONS, INC. (THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT). STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED, APPELLANT IN NO. 15477. JOHN HANIGAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HANIGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15478. WALTER HINKLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HINKLE EXCAVATION COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15479. ROBERT R. TYLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE ROBERT R. TYLER COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15480
STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
EDWARD THOMAS SUBERS; STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED V. JOHN HANIGAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HANIGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, WALTER HINKLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HINKLE EXCAVATION COMPANY AND ROBERT R. TYLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE ROBERT R. TYLER AND CO. AND JOHN MCSHAIN, INC. (THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF) V. WILLIAM H. WALTERS & SONS, INC. (THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT). STELLA MCSPARRAN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF IGNATIUS PETER KANE, DECEASED, APPELLANT IN NO. 15477. JOHN HANIGAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HANIGAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15478. WALTER HINKLE, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE HINKLE EXCAVATION COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15479. ROBERT R. TYLER, INDIVIDUALLY AND TRADING AS THE ROBERT R. TYLER COMPANY, APPELLANT IN NO. 15480
356 F.2d 983
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1966)
Caution
Cited by 19 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We find that as to the merits, with particular reference to the primary questions of liability of appellants, the first trial of these suits was without substantial error and that the issues were properly submitted to the jury.
We further find that the refusal of the trial judge to mold the verdicts in these causes after the first trial thereof was within his discretion.
The judgments in these cases will be affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Bornstein, 423 U.S. 303 (U.S. 1976)
-
Jankowitz v. The United States, 533 F.2d 538 (Ct. Cl. 1976)
-
Airco Indus. Gases v. The Teamsters Health & Welf. Pension Fund OF Philadelphia & Vicinity, 850 F.2d 1028 (3d Cir. 1988)
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence