Priester v. Southern Ry. Co.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
ROSE, Circuit Judge.
This case has been here before. 289 F. 945 . At that time, after full consideration, a judgment below for the plaintiffs was reversed, on the ground that they had offered no evidence legally sufficient to support a verdict in their favor. The ease was then remanded for a new trial. That has been now held, and under the direction of the learned District Judge a verdict was returned for the defendant. The- plaintiffs assign error.
It goes without saying that, if the testimony offered at the second trial did not differ in any material respect from that which was presented when the ease was first heard, the District Court had no choice other than to give the direction it did. Thompson v. *879 Maxwell Land Grant & R. Co., 168 U. S. 456 , 18 S. Ct. 121 , 42 L. Ed. 539 . We have carefully examined the present record, and fail to find any substantial distinction between the evidence in it and that which we considered some two years ago.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.