|
|
Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co., 283 U.S. 494 (1931)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co., 283 U.S. 494 (1931)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 283 U.S. 488, click here.
Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co. No. 362 Argued April 17, 1931 Decided May 18, 1931 283 U.S. 494
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. The Seventh Amendment preserves the substance of jury trial, and not the old form of procedure. P. 498.
2. Where its requirement of a jury trial has been satisfied by a verdict according to law upon one issue of fact, the Seventh Amendment does not compel a new trial of that issue even though another and separable issue must be tried again. P. 499.
3. Where the practice permits a partial new trial, it may not properly be resorted to unless it clearly appears that the issue to be retried is so distinct and separable from the others that a trial of it alone may be had without injustice. P. 500.
4. Petitioner sued for royalties under a contract licensing the use of a patented process of manufacture. Respondent counterclaimed for damages alleged to have resulted from failure by petitioner to perform a related contract to construct part of a plant for lack of which, respondent said, it incurred expenses for storage and suffered losses from several causes, including loss of anticipated profits. There was a verdict for the petitioner on its cause of action and for the respondent on the counterclaim. Held that, in reversing the judgment as to the counterclaim and directing a new trial with respect to the amount of damages because of error in the instructions concerning the measure of damages under it, it was not necessary to disturb the judgment on the main cause of action, but there should be a retrial of all the issues raised by the counterclaim, because the date of formation and breach, as well as the scope, of the contract therein relied upon were left in such doubt by the record, including the verdict, that the question of damages could not be submitted to a jury independently of the question of liability without confusion and uncertainty.
33 F.2d 521 reversed.
Certiorari, 282 U.S. 824, to review a judgment reversing a judgment in an action on a contract and directing a new trial restricted to the amount of damages on a counterclaim.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co., 283 U.S. 494 (1931) in 283 U.S. 494 283 U.S. 495. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N6G1XWU965YKAWQ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co., 283 U.S. 494 (1931), in 283 U.S. 494, page 283 U.S. 495. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N6G1XWU965YKAWQ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Gasoline Products Co., Inc. v. Champlin Refining Co., 283 U.S. 494 (1931). cited in 1931, 283 U.S. 494, pp.283 U.S. 495. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=N6G1XWU965YKAWQ.
|