CAFFEY, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE,

v.

BERESLAVSKY

Citator

Cited By (43 total)

• Wilkerson v. McCARTHY, 336 U.S. 53 (U.S. 1949)
  …T. R. Co. v. Howard, 328 U. S. 867. Gardner v. Griswold, 329 U. S. 725. Henwood v. Chaney, 329 U. S. 760. Boston & Maine R. v. Meech, 329 U. S. 763. Wheeling & L. E. R. Co. v. Keith, 332 U. S. 763. Delaware, Lackawanna & W. R. Co. v. Mostyn, 332 U. S. 770. Atlantic Coast Line v. Meeks, 333 U. S. 827. Wabash R. Co. v. Hampton, 333 U. S. 833. Fleming v. Husted, 333 U. S. 843. Unity R. Co. v. Kurimsky, 333 U. S. 855. Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Skidmore, 335 U. S. 816. E. Where lower court set aside…
• Korte v. New York, 191 F.2d 86 (2d Cir. 1951)
  …ns and of the law as thus announced that we have felt it our dut}' to uphold jury verdicts under comparable conditions. Morris v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 2 Cir., 187 F. 2d 837; Mostyn v. Delaware L. & W. R. Co., 2 Cir., 160 F. 2d 15, certiorari denied 332 U.S. 770, 68 S.Ct. 82, 92 L.Ed. 355. The verdict of the jury must therefore stand unless there was error in the reception of evidence. The question here presented as to the admission of the doctors’ reports is an interesting and important one in the applica…
• United States v. DiCARLO, 575 F.2d 952 (1st Cir. 1978)
  …ct may not be impeached by a juror’s testimony that the jury was guilty of misconceptions of fact or law, employed unsound reasoning, indulged in improper argument, etc. See, e. g., Young v. United States, 10 Cir., 1947, 163 F. 2d 187, cert. denied, 332 U.S. 770, 68 S.Ct. 83, 92 L.Ed. 355; 6A J. Moore, Federal Practice, 159.-08[4] at 148-49 (2d ed. 1974). While there are exceptions, the present case is far from such. Newly discovered evidence. Defendants submitted three unsworn statements, two by witnesse…