Globe Liquor Co v. San Roman, No. 205
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | BLACK |
| Citation | 332 U.S. 571,92 L.Ed. 177,68 S.Ct. 246 |
| Parties | GLOBE LIQUOR CO., Inc. v. SAN ROMAN et al |
| Docket Number | No. 205 |
| Decision Date | 05 January 1948 |
v.
SAN ROMAN et al.
Mr. Benjamin W. Heineman, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Mr. Nat M. Kahn, of Chicago, Ill., for respondents.
Page 572
Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.
The petitioner, Globe Liquor Company, Inc., brought this act on in Federal District Court against respondents, Frank and Dorothea San Roman, doing business under the name of International Industries. The complaint claimed damages for an alleged breach of warranty in the sale of certain liquors. An answer was filed; issues were appropriately joined. After all the evidence had been introduced, each party requested a directed verdict. The petitioner's motion was granted, verdict was returned in its favor, and judgment was accordingly entered. The respondents then moved for a new trial on the ground among others that there were many contested issues of fact which should have been submitted to the jury. They did not move for judgment under Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, which provides in part: 'Within 10 days after the reception of a verdict, a party who has moved for a directed verdict may move to have the verdict and any judgment entered thereon set aside and to have judgment entered in accordance with his motion for a directed verdict * * *. A motion for a new trial may be joined with this motion, or a new trial may be prayed for in the alternative. If a verdict was returned the court may allow the judgment to stand or may reopen the judgment and either order a new trial or direct the entry of judgment as if the requested verdict had been directed.' On appeal the Circuit Court of Appeals not only set aside the judgment in favor of the petitioner but also remanded the case to the District Court with directions to enter judgment for the respondent. 7 Cir., 160 F.2d 800. We granted certiorari, 332 U.S. 756, 68 S.Ct. 74, to consider the apparent inconsistency between this latter action of the Circuit Court of Appeals and our holding in Cone v. West Virginia Pulp and Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 67 S.Ct. 752, 755.
In the Cone case we held that the Circuit Court of Appeals was without power to order the entry of final judg-
Page 573
ment for the loser of a jury verdict in the District Court where he had failed to follow his motion for directed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Washburn v. City of Fed. Way, No. 66534–1–I.
...S.Ct. 980 (quoting Cone v. W. Va. Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 218, 67 S.Ct. 752, 91 L.Ed. 849 (1947); Globe Liquor Co. v. San Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177 (1948)). 87.Id. 88.Id. at 401, 126 S.Ct. 980 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (alteration in orig......
-
Belk, Inc. v. Meyer Corp., No. 10–1664.
...power to direct the District Court to enter judgment contrary to the one it had permitted to stand.”); Globe Liquor Co. v. San Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177 (1948) (holding that a party's failure to file a Rule 50(b) motion deprives the appellate court of the power to orde......
-
Doe v. McMillan, No. 71-1027.
...the power of inquiry. Barsky v. United States, 83 U.S.App.D. C. 127, 131, 167 F.2d 241, 245, cert. denied, 334 U.S. 843, 68 S.Ct. 1511, 92 L. Ed. 177 (1948). See Fields v. United States, 82 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 164 F.2d 97 (1947), and authorities cited therein; McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 1......
-
Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative, No. 57
...754, 93 L.Ed. 971; Weade v. Dichmann, Wright & Pugh, Inc., 337 U.S. 801, 69 S.Ct. 1326, 93 L.Ed. 1704; Globe Liquor Co. v. Sam Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177; Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 67 S.Ct. 752, 91 L.Ed. 849. II. A question is also presented ......
-
Washburn v. City of Fed. Way, No. 66534–1–I.
...S.Ct. 980 (quoting Cone v. W. Va. Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 218, 67 S.Ct. 752, 91 L.Ed. 849 (1947); Globe Liquor Co. v. San Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177 (1948)). 87.Id. 88.Id. at 401, 126 S.Ct. 980 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (alteration in orig......
-
Belk, Inc. v. Meyer Corp., No. 10–1664.
...power to direct the District Court to enter judgment contrary to the one it had permitted to stand.”); Globe Liquor Co. v. San Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177 (1948) (holding that a party's failure to file a Rule 50(b) motion deprives the appellate court of the power to orde......
-
Doe v. McMillan, No. 71-1027.
...the power of inquiry. Barsky v. United States, 83 U.S.App.D. C. 127, 131, 167 F.2d 241, 245, cert. denied, 334 U.S. 843, 68 S.Ct. 1511, 92 L. Ed. 177 (1948). See Fields v. United States, 82 U.S.App.D.C. 354, 164 F.2d 97 (1947), and authorities cited therein; McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 1......
-
Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative, No. 57
...754, 93 L.Ed. 971; Weade v. Dichmann, Wright & Pugh, Inc., 337 U.S. 801, 69 S.Ct. 1326, 93 L.Ed. 1704; Globe Liquor Co. v. Sam Roman, 332 U.S. 571, 68 S.Ct. 246, 92 L.Ed. 177; Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 67 S.Ct. 752, 91 L.Ed. 849. II. A question is also presented ......