 | Mihill Slaughter - 1819 - 198 pages
...did or did not constitute a hinding contract, was no ground for a new trial, that heing a question of law for the Court, and not of fact for the jury. — Wontner v. Shairp, Mag, 1846. received a letter of allotment for thirty Shares, signed hy the Seeretary,... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1830 - 1076 pages
...been improperly received as to the materiality of the facts not communicated, and that was a question of law for the Court, and not of fact for the jury. Against this rule, on the 8th of February in this term, Mr. Pollock and Mr. Tomlinson shewed cause.... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - Equity - 1889 - 936 pages
...question of negligence or diligence, as it affects the plaintiff's husband or the defendant, is a question of law for the court, and not of fact for the jury. The two sentences excepted to, taken by themselves, would seem to be erroneous, but taken in connection... | |
 | Florida. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1848 - 786 pages
...whether le^al or equitable, is the exclusion of evidence, and its existence must always be a question of law for the court, and not of fact for the jury. Ib. 3. The doctrine of estoppel IS pait laid down in Ootten v. Wllliams, and Camp v. Parkhlll's administrators... | |
 | Law - 1848 - 638 pages
...did or did not constitute a binding contract, was no ground for a new trial, that being a question of law for the court, and not of fact for the jury. Wontner v. Slieirp, 4 Carrow & Oliv. 542. DEVIATION. See Plaits deposited. DIRECTORS' POWERS. Pledging... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1894 - 778 pages
...show the employment of a watchman. The fads were undisputed, and the question, therefore, became one of law for the court, and not of fact for the jury. Frederickson was engaged in an occupation which evidently required his constant attention. He was not:... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1897 - 796 pages
...none before." All the essential facts in the present case are undisputed, and the question was one of law for the court, and not of fact for the jury. In this connection I quote, with approval, the language of the court of appeals of New York, in Appleby... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1891 - 776 pages
...judgment, for 12 honest jurors to have reached any other conclusion, and in such case the question is one of law, for the court, and not of fact, for the jury. Judgment should be affirmed. CHAHPLIX, CJ, concurred with GKANT, J. CHARLES H. PLUMMER v. THE TOWNSHIP... | |
 | Patent laws and legislation - 1854 - 868 pages
...the facts, the questions of reasonable or unreasonable time, or delay, or diligence, are questions of law for the Court, and not of fact for the jury. The following cases are referred to : — Ellis v. Paige, 1 Pick. 43 ; SC 2 ib. 71, 77, note; Gilbert... | |
 | Edward William Cox - Criminal law - 1855 - 796 pages
...provision against false pretences contained in stat. 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c, 29, s. 53. That was a question of law for the court and not of fact for the jury; therefore the verdict ought to have no effect upon the judgment of the court. The statute was passed... | |
| |
If it was sufficient of itself, it was a question of law for the court and not of fact for the jury. 
