Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

64 F.2d 1018

Docket No. 75.

Poresky v. Pierce

Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided April 3, 1933.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1933-04-03

2 counsel of record

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1933-04-03

¶1Simeon Poresky, in pro. per.

¶2Arthur B. O’Keefe and Harry M. French, both of New Haven, Conn., for appellees.

¶3Before MANTON, L. HAND, and SWAN, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5We have examined the printed record and supplemental typewritten transcript of the testimony submitted by the appellant, who has appeared in person, with care, because he, without legal training, has been obliged to argue his own appeal. After such careful examination, we are forced to the conclusion that the motion to set aside the jury’s verdict was properly denied. We find no errors in the trial which justify our reversing the judgment entered for the appellees.

¶6Judgment affirmed.

/64/f2d/1018 · .json · Public domain