U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1924

Haughran v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided November 17, 1924 · Donahue, Knappjbn, Maok

1 F.2d 1021; 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 1949 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

C. C. Middleswart, of Marietta, Ohio (Edw. B. Follett, of Marietta, Ohio, on the brief), for plaintiffs in error. Benson W. Hough, Dana F. Reynolds, and W. B. Bartels, all of Columbus, Ohio, for defendant in error.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

It appears from the record and briefs in this case and the statement of counsel in open court that the sole contention of plaintiffs in error is that the verdict of the jury is manifestly against the weight of the evidence. This court has no authority to consider and determine the weight of the evidence. R. S. § 1011 (Comp. Stat. § 1672); Roth v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 294 F. 475; Bullock v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 289 F. 29, 32. Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.