TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Marcella A. Haugh v. J. R. Curlee

Marcella A. HAUGH, Appellant, v. J. R. CURLEE, Appellee

Haugh v. J. R. Curlee, 265 F.2d 130 (5th Cir. 1959)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 25, 1959
Docket
No. 17519_1
Judges
Rives, Tuttle, Simpson
Citations
265 F.2d 1301959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4163

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff below, sued to recover for personal injuries received in an automobile collision. The jury returned a verdict for defendant. Two questions are sought to be presented to this Court. (1) Under the facts and circumstances of this case, does the law of Florida require a charge to the jury on the “last clear chance” doctrine? (2) Did the district court abuse its discretion in not granting a new trial based on newly discovered evidence ?

The “last clear chance” doctrine was contained in appellant’s requested jury instructions Nos. 6 and 10 which were refused. Even after the trial judge specifically gave an opportunity to object to the jury instructions, counsel failed to do so before the jury retired. We find no plain error resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, appellant has not reserved for appellate review the failure to give an instruction on the last clear chance doctrine. Rule 51, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.

The newly discovered evidence in all probability would not produce a different result and there is no adequate showing that this evidence could not by due diligence have been produced at the trial. “Clearly, there was no reviewable abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of the motion for new trial upon this ground.” Phillips v. Employers Mutual Liability Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 5 Cir., 1956, 239 F.2d 79, 82 .

The judgment is Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1960: 11961: 11969: 21970: 219602026peak 1969 · 2

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Phillips v. Employers Mut. Liab. Ins. Co. of Wis., 239 F.2d 79 (5th Cir. 1956) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list