General
VOS v. CARROLL
123 F. 1008·United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania·1903
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
VOS v. CARROLL.
(Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
July 15, 1903.)
No. 48.
A. S. Arnold, for plaintiff. T. E. White, for defendant.
[MAJORITY — J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.]
J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.
It is clear that the motion for a new trial must prevail. Dist. of Columbia v. Armes, 107 U. S. 519, 2 Sup. Ct. 840, 27 L. Ed. 618. This being so, it may not be amiss for me to express my opinion that both parties may find it judicious to come to a settlement of the case on moderate terms, rather than to encounter the uncertainty and expense of further litigation. A new trial is granted.