Case ID: f_176/html/1023-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THOMPSON v. DUNNINGTON.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    February 28, 1910.)
    No. 941.
    On Petition to Superintend and Revise, in Matter of Law, Proceedings of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    George Bryan and E. B. Thom-ason (Thomason & Minor, on the briefs), for petitioner.
    J. T. Coleman (Coleman, Easley & Coleman, on the briefs), for respondent.
    Before PRITCHARD, Circuit Judge, and BOYD and DAYTON, District Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

After careful consideration of this record, we are clearly of the opinion that the alleged errors sought to be revised and corrected present not alone questions of law but of fact, and should, therefore, have been brought here by appeal; but, while we reach this conclusion, we nevertheless realize the case has been properly determined on its merits. Coder, Trustee, v. Aris, 213 U. S. 223, 29 Sup. Ct. 436, 53 L. Ed. 772; Steiner v. Marshall, 140 Fed. 710, 72 C. C. A. 103; Kenova L. & T. Co. v. Graham, 135 Fed. 717, 68 C. C. A. 355. Petition dismissed.