UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO & MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA ET AL.

v.

WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (37 total)

• Morelock v. The NCR Corp., 586 F.2d 1096 (6th Cir. 1978)
  …er granting judgment n. o. v. is not an order in which findings of fact and conclusions of law are authorized by Rule 52. See Hamilton Foundry & Mach. Co. v. International Molders & Foundry Workers Union, 193 F. 2d 209, 213 (6th Cir.), cert, denied, 343 U.S. 966, 72 S.Ct. 1060, 96 L.Ed. 1363 (1952); cf. O’Brien v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 293 F. 2d 1, 8 (3d Cir. 1961) (findings of fact not necessary in granting a motion for a directed verdict). We note however, that in our opinion, it is the better practi…
• Troupe v. Chicago, 234 F.2d 253 (2d Cir. 1956)
  …the court at the time the ruling was first sought, she was not required to repeat the objection when defendant renewed its motion and when the court granted the motion. Keen v. Overseas Tankship Corp., 2 Cir., 1952, 194 F. 2d 515, certiorari denied 343 U.S. 966, 72 S.Ct. 1061, 96 L.Ed. 1363; Sweeney v. United Feature Syndicate, 2 Cir., 1942, 129 F. 2d 904; Williams v. Powers, 6 Cir., 1943, 135 F. 2d 153, 156; Green v. Reading Co., 3 Cir., 1950, 183 F. 2d 716, 719. A point is properly preserved when a party…
• The Indus. Dev. Bd. OF the Town OF Section v. Fuqua Indus., Inc., 523 F.2d 1226 (5th Cir. 1975)
  …continued to argue a position that the district court apparently refused to accept would be to place an unnecessarily strict penalty on Van Heusen. As the court said in Keen v. Overseas Tank Ship Corp., 2 Cir. 1952, 194 F. 2d 515, 519, cert. denied, 343 U.S. 966, 72 S.Ct. 1061, 96 L.Ed. 1363, “[N]othing goes further to disturb the proper atmosphere of a trial than reiterated insistence upon a position which the judge has once considered and decided.” 11 As Nowell and other cases hold, even when there has b…