From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Federal Res. Bk. of Phila. v. Ocean City, N.J

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Dec 6, 1937
93 F.2d 519 (3d Cir. 1937)

Summary

stating that a mandate which orders a judgment reversed may imply direction for a new trial

Summary of this case from United States v. Cote

Opinion

No. 6368.

December 6, 1937.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey; John Boyd Avis, Judge.

On motion for supplemental opinion.

Opinion and mandate construed.

For former opinion, see 91 F.2d 635.

MacCoy, Brittain, Evans Lewis, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

Bourgeois Coulomb, of Atlantic City, N.J., for appellee.

Before THOMPSON and BIGGS, Circuit Judges, and DICKINSON, District Judge.


In Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia v. Ocean City, N.J., 91 F.2d 635, our opinion concluded with the sentence: "The judgment of the court below is reversed."

As was stated by this court in Kosak v. United States, 54 F.2d 72, a mandate which orders judgment reversed may imply a direction for a new trial. In the instant case we intended that the cause be resubmitted to a jury and therefore direct that our opinion and mandate be so construed.


Summaries of

Federal Res. Bk. of Phila. v. Ocean City, N.J

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Dec 6, 1937
93 F.2d 519 (3d Cir. 1937)

stating that a mandate which orders a judgment reversed may imply direction for a new trial

Summary of this case from United States v. Cote
Case details for

Federal Res. Bk. of Phila. v. Ocean City, N.J

Case Details

Full title:FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF PHILADELPHIA v. OCEAN CITY, N.J

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Dec 6, 1937

Citations

93 F.2d 519 (3d Cir. 1937)

Citing Cases

United States v. Cote

Accordingly, unless the reversing court indicates in its mandate or opinion that a retrial is prohibited…