From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coffin v. Harris-Woodbury Lumber Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 14, 1911
187 F. 1005 (4th Cir. 1911)

Opinion

No. 1,013.

June 14, 1911.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville.

Allan D. Cole (William P. Bynum, R. C. Strudwick, and E. J. Justice, on the brief), for appellants.

James H. Merrimon and Coleman C. Cowan, for appellee.

Before GOFF, Circuit Judge, and WADDILL and ROSE, District Judges.


MEMORANDUM DECISIONS


In the court below this case was referred to a special master by an order entered with the consent of the parties. The master heard the evidence, found the facts, and applied the law applicable thereto. His report, with the exceptions filed by the defendants below to the same, were duly considered, the latter found to be without merit, the former being confirmed. 179 Fed. 257. We have simply to determine whether the said report, on which the decree appealed from is based, was supported by the evidence taken by the master, whose conclusions, approved of by the court below, will not be set aside, unless it plainly appears that a mistake was made in the consideration of the evidence. Our examination of the record satisfies us that the report made by the master was fully justified by the evidence, and that the decree of the court below is without error. Affirmed.


Summaries of

Coffin v. Harris-Woodbury Lumber Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit
Jun 14, 1911
187 F. 1005 (4th Cir. 1911)
Case details for

Coffin v. Harris-Woodbury Lumber Co.

Case Details

Full title:COFFIN et al. v. HARRIS-WOODBURY LUMBER CO

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jun 14, 1911

Citations

187 F. 1005 (4th Cir. 1911)

Citing Cases

Velasquez v. Franz

In addition, they argued that the doctrine of res judicata barred the complaint. The New Jersey trial court…

United States v. Indian Hill Farm

This is not properly evidence newly discovered under the tests stated in, e.g., United States v. On Lee, 2…