Maryland Casualty Co. v. Jones, 279 U.S. 792 (1929)

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 279 U.S. 787, click here.

Maryland Casualty Company v. Jones


No. 524


Argued April 18, 1929
Decided June 3, 1929
[U.S. Reports citation not yet available]

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Syllabus

1. In a case at law tried in the district court without a jury under Rev.Stats. §§ 649, 700, rulings made in the progress of the trial on questions of law, such as rulings admitting or rejecting evidence, denying a motion for a nonsuit, or referring the case to a special master to take further testimony and state an account are reviewable, and the right to review them is not lost because of the fact that a general finding or special findings sufficient apparently to support the judgment are thereafter made by the court. P. 795.

2. A motion for a nonsuit at the close of such a trial, upon the ground that the evidence, with every inference of fact that may be drawn from it in favor of the plaintiff, is insufficient to sustain a judgment in his favor presents a question of law reviewable by the appellate court. P. 795.

3. Where the Circuit court of appeals considered only a part of the assignments of error, treating them as all that were in the case, it is not to be assumed that the others were deemed to have been waived under its rules through not having been specified in the brief where there is nothing in that court’s opinion or in the record referring to such a waiver. P. 796.

4. This Court cannot go out of the record to examine a copy of a brief used in the Circuit Court of Appeal for the purpose of determining whether assignments of error in that court were deemed to have been waived by a failure to specify them in the brief. P. 796.

5. Where a failure of the circuit court of appeals to consider assignments of error is unexplained and apparently erroneous, the case will be remanded with instructions to consider them and, unless they have been waived, take further proceedings in the case. P. 796.

27 F.2d 521 reversed.

Certiorari, 278 U.S. 596, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals affirming a recovery in the district Court in an action on an indemnity bond.