DE BOTHEZAT IMPELLER CO., INC.

v.

AMERICAN MACHINE & METALS, INC.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Rose, 215 F.2d 617 (3d Cir. 1954)
  …rty uses an earlier statement of his own witness to refresh the witness’ memory, the only evidence recognized as such is the testimony so refreshed.’ ” Observation to this effect was made in United States v. Seavey, 3 Cir., 1950, 180 F. 2d 837, 840; 339 U.S. 979, 70 S.Ct. 1023, 94 L.Ed. 1383.13 Accordingly, it follows that since Cohen’s records were not admissible and there remained as a consequence only his oral testimony on the score of the charged falsity of the defendant’s statement as to his dealings w…
• United States v. Hiss, 185 F.2d 822 (2d Cir. 1950)
  …. Had each testified to a separate occasion, their testimony might, nevertheless, have satisfied the two witness rule in prosecutions for perjury and have taken count two to the jury. United States v. Seavey, 3 Cir., 180 F. 2d 837; certiorari denied 339 U. S. 979, 70 S.Ct. 1023; United States v. Palese, 3 Cir., 133 F. 2d 600. We are not confronted with that question, however, for the trial judge instructed the jury that the two witness rule required that Mr. and Mrs. Chambers testify to the same occurrence.…
• United States v. Marachowsky, 201 F.2d 5 (7th Cir. 1953)
  …titute sufficient corroboration of a single direct witness to establish a charge of false oaths in a bankruptcy proceeding. See also United States v. Hiss, 2 Cir., 185 F. 2d 822, 830; United States v. Seavey, 3 Cir., 180 F. 2d 837, certiorari denied 339 U.S. 979, 70 S.Ct. 1023, 94 L.Ed. 1383; Radomsky v. U. S., 9 Cir., 180 F. 2d 781, cited by defendants stands only for the proposition that where there is no direct testimony of a witness to the falsity charged, circumstances alone are not sufficient to susta…