TIDEWATER DEVELOPMENT AND SALES CORPORATION AND ISADORE BRILL, TRUSTEE, OLIVER ELLSWORTH RUE, TRUSTEE, GOTHAM INVESTMENT CORPORATION, PHILIP SMITH, HAROLD E. LUBER, MORRIS REAMER, AND ROBERTA HOFFMAN, APPELLANTS,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
TIDEWATER DEVELOPMENT AND SALES CORPORATION AND ISADORE BRILL, TRUSTEE, OLIVER ELLSWORTH RUE, TRUSTEE, GOTHAM INVESTMENT CORPORATION, PHILIP SMITH, HAROLD E. LUBER, MORRIS REAMER, AND ROBERTA HOFFMAN, APPELLANTS,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE
279 F.2d 890
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (1960)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
[*891] PER CURIAM.
In this condemnation case, the landowner and certain noteholders, to whom it is indebted, thinking the jury’s verdict inadequate, complain of the District Court’s refusal of a motion for new trial. In denying the motion, the District Court filed an opinion1 which sufficiently shows there was no abuse of discretion in denial of the motion. After considering certain collateral questions which have been raised, we find no reversible error. Affirmed.
. United States of America v. 9.85 Acres of Land, More or Less, in City of Hampton, Virginia, and Tidewater Developmont and Sales Corporation, et al., 183 F.Supp. 402.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Evans v. United States, 326 F.2d 827 (8th Cir. 1964)
-
United States v. TWO Tracts OF Land IN the Town OF Brookhaven, 412 F.2d 347 (2d Cir. 1969)