HOLMES

v.

CONTINENTAL CASUALTY CO. ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (12 total)

• Edwards v. Sears, 512 F.2d 276 (5th Cir. 1975)
  …a fair trial, and the error must be cor-reefed and a new trial required even in the absence of timely objection. See San Antonio v. Timko, 2 Cir., 1966, 368 F. 2d 983, 986; Klotz v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 7 Cir., 1959, 267 F. 2d 53, 55, cert. denied, 361 U.S. 877, 80 S.Ct. 141, 4 L.Ed.2d 114; Theriot v. Mercer, 5 Cir., 1959, 262 F. 2d 754, cert. denied, 359 U.S. 983, 79 S.Ct. 941, 3 L.Ed.2d 933; F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Wilson, 5 Cir., 1934, 74 F. 2d 439, 442-443. See also New York Central R. Co. v. Johnson,…
• Spray-Rite Serv. Corp. v. Monsanto Co., 684 F.2d 1226 (7th Cir. 1982)
  …-Rite. The remark was clearly improper, but we are not convinced that it was so prejudicial that it deprived Monsanto of a fair trial. The appeal to sympathy was not repeated. Klotz v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 267 F. 2d 53, 55 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 877, 80 S.Ct. 141, 4 L.Ed.2d 114 (1959). Moreover, the jury was properly instructed concerning the law it should apply in determining liability and damages. We certainly do not condone Spray-Rite’s argument, but we find that it was harmless error. Shroy…
• Bankers Tr. Co. v. Publicker Indus., Inc., 641 F.2d 1361 (2d Cir. 1981)
  …5. Publicker claims that Bankers Trust’s summation was improper in that the word “you” was used ten times in six sen-fences,6 making a personal appeal to the jury. Publicker cites Klotz v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 267 F. 2d 53 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 877, 80 S.Ct. 141, 4 L.Ed.2d 114 (1959), which involved a plaintiff’s attorney asking the jurors to award the amount of money that they would want had they lost one of their eyes. Those statements were in effect pleas to the sympathy of the jury and, as…