U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1931

Leapley v. Matthews

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided June 1, 1931 · Hitz

50 F.2d 1016; 60 App. D.C. 251; 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4633 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Wm. F. Kelly and P. J. J. Nicolaides, both of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff in error., G. Lyle Hughes, of Washington, D. C., for defendant in error.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Hamilton v. United States (D.C. 1943)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

HITZ, Associate Justice.

The only error assigned to which exception was taken in the court below is the third: “The Court erred in overruling the plaintiff’s motion for new trial, because the finding of fact is contrary to the evidence, the weight of the evidence and the law.”

“According to federal practice this is not assignable as error.” Whelan v. Welch, 50 App. D. C. 174, 269 F. 689, 690, and eases cited; Preleau v. U. S., 50 App. D. C. 287, 271 F. 361; Hill v. U. S., 22 App. D. C. 396.

The judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.

Affirmed.

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