McCrary v. Seatrain Lines, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• the district court, before the close of evidence, indicated that a renewal would be useless
• “Premature motions to sever not diligently pursued as the prejudicial evidence unfolds cannot serve as insurance against an adverse verdict.”
• two defendants who do not renew motion to sever at all waive right to appeal, but three defendants who renew motions twice during trial may appeal the issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).