In re Iron Clad Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 197 F. 280
• 116 C.C.A. 642
• 1912 U.S. App. LEXIS 1288

Syllabus

<p>1. Trial (§ 177*) — Cross-Motions foe Direction of Verdict — Effect.</p> <p>The fact that each party asks for a peremptory- instruction to find in his‘ favor does not submit the issues of fact to the court, so as to deprive either party of the right to ask other instructions, and to except to the refusal to give them, or of the right to have questions of fact submitted to the jury, where the evidence thereon is conflicting, or divergent inferences can be drawn therefrom.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Trial, Cent. Dig. § 400; Dec. Dig. § 177.*]</p> <p>2. Trial (fj 1,39*) — Direction of Verdict — Power of Court.</p> <p>If the evidence is of such a conclusive character that upon it as a whole the court would feel constrained to set aside a verdict, if rendered in favor of one party, it may direct a verdict in favor of the other party, although there be conflicting evidence as to details not essential to a conclusion.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Trial, Cent. Dig. §§ 332, 333, 338-341, 365; Dec. Dig. § 189.*]</p> <p>3. Bankruptcy (§ 95*) — Involuntary Proceedings — Issue of Insolvency— Direction of Verdict.</p> <p>On the trial of the issue of insolvency in involuntary proceedings against a corporation, the court was justified in directing a verdict of insolvency where, although the books showed an excess of assets over liabilities', the president of the corporation, who was also the sole stockholder, testified to errors in the books which, if corrected, would make them show an excess of liabilities, and there was no testimony to show a better financial condition than thus appeared.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Bankruptcy, Cent. Dig. §§ 132, 140, 145; Dee. Dig. § 95.*]</p>