KNOWLES ELECTRONICS, INC., ET AL.

v.

TIBBETTS INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Reichenbach v. Smith, 528 F.2d 1072 (5th Cir. 1976)
  …0, 75 L.Ed. 624, 629; accord, United States v. Lawrance, 5 Cir., 1974, 498 F. 2d 1065, 1066; Gordon v. United States, 5 Cir., 1971, 438 F. 2d 858, 865; State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. McFerrin, 5 Cir., 1967, 382 F. 2d 282, 283, cert. denied, 1968, 390 U.S. 953, 88 S.Ct. 1045, 19 L.Ed.2d 1145. It is “fundamental that control of cross-examination rests in the discretion of the trial court and will be disturbed only when abused.” Burns v. Travelers Insurance Co., 5 Cir., 1965, 344 F. 2d 70, 72. In deciding…
• Hatrock v. Edward D. Jones & Co., 750 F.2d 767 (9th Cir. 1984)
  …jury as a question at law. The allowance and amount of attorneys’ fees is not a jury question, but is within the sound discretion of the trial judge. See State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. McFerrin, 382 F. 2d 282, 283 (5th Cir.1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 953, 88 S.Ct. 1045, 19 L.Ed.2d 1145 (1968); Dustin v. Beckstrand, 103 Idaho 780, 786, 654 P. 2d 368, 374 (1982) (“[t]he allowance and amount of attorney’s fees is not a jury question”). C. Hatrocks’ Cross-Appeal. The Hatrocks argue that the district c…
• State OF S.D. v. Long, 465 F.2d 65 (8th Cir. 1972)
  …that an exception to that rule may be shown from the individual facts. See e. g., United States v. Chaplin, 435 F. 2d 320, 322 (2d Cir. 1970) (although pre-Miranda warnings); United States v. Fisher, 387 F. 2d 165, 169 (2d Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 953, 88 S.Ct. 1047, 19 L.Ed.2d 1146 (1968); United States v. Lubitsch, 266 F.Supp. 294, 297 (S.D.N.Y.1967). In this case, the State argues that no prejudice resulted because the defendants were all able to retain counsel. But that is an ex post facto d…