Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
General
UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO. v. GARNER
13 F.2d 125·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·1926
Before ALSCHULER, EVANS, and PAGE, Circuit Judges.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO. v. GARNER.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
May 28, 1926.)
No. 3631.
Appeal and error @=>850(2) — In case of trial by court after written waiver of jury, finding being general, only rulings in progress of trial are reviewable (Rev. St. §§ 649, 700 [Comp. St. §§ 1587, 1668]).
Under Rev. St. §§ 649, 700 (Comp. St. §§ 1587, 1668), trial having been by court after written waiver of jury trial, and finding being general, there is nothing for review, except rulings in the progress of the trial.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Southern District of Illinois.
Action by the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company against John F. Gamer. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
Affirmed.
Louis E. Hart, of Chicago, 111., for plaintiff in error.
Geo. H. Wilson, of Quincy, 111., and R. Allan Stephens, of Springfield, 111., for defendant in error.
Before ALSCHULER, EVANS, and PAGE, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PAGE, Circuit Judge.]
PAGE, Circuit Judge.
In this case there was a trial by the court after the right of jury trial had been waived in writing. A motion, made by defendant at the close of plaintiff’s evidence for a finding in favor of defendant, was denied, with leave to renew the motion at the close of all the evidence. At the close of all the evidence, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant made any motion or request, and at the close of arguments the court delivered its opinion at considerable . length, finding the issues for the defendant. Then the record shows: “To which finding of the court and entry of judgment the plaintiff, by its counsel, then and there duly excepted.”
Under sections 649 and 700 of Revised Statutes (Comp. St. §§ 1587, 1668), the record presents here no question of law or fact for review, except as to certain rulings upon the evidence, made during the progress of the trial, which are brought into question. We have made an examination of all such rulings, and are of opinion that there is not shown in that respect any material error.
The judgment of the District Court is af-, firmed.