NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY CO.

v.

CHARLES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Hayes, 589 F.2d 811 (5th Cir. 1979)
  …95 (1954); United States v. Stokes, 506 F. 2d 771 (5th Cir. 1975); United States v. Walker, 216 F. 2d 683 (5th Cir. 1954), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 959, 75 S.Ct. 450, 99 L.Ed. 748 (1955); Lynch v. United States, 189 F. 2d 476 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 831, 72 S.Ct. 50, 96 L.Ed. 629 (1951). The question, therefore, is whether the 1968 Amendment has altered the equation by adding a life imprisonment provision in § 242 cases where “death results.” We hold that the 1968 Amendment alters the statute onl…
• United States v. Stokes, 506 F.2d 771 (5th Cir. 1975)
  …part of the body of due process rights protected by the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution, so that a willful deprivation of that right comes within the purview of § 242. In Lynch v. United States, 189 F. 2d 476 (5th Cir. 1951), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 831, 72 S.Ct. 50, 96 L.Ed. 629, this court held that rights protected by the fourteenth amendment include: “the rights of persons under state arrest not to be deprived of their personal security (which is embraced within the word ‘liberty’) except in ac…
• Mrs. T. H. Duncan (C. W. Duncan v. Duncan, 377 F.2d 49 (6th Cir. 1967)
  …1959), the court held the District Court’s refusal to grant a new trial to be a clear abuse of discretion where the verdict was found to lack evidentiary support. See also Charles v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 188 F. 2d 691 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 831, 72 S. Ct. 55, 96 L.Ed. 628 (1951). Appellant further contends that “in setting aside the verdict on the basis of his dissatisfaction with it, [the district judge] lapsed into the inapplicable Tennessee practice, considered himself as a thirteenth…