Case Name: MARTIN v. STAPLES
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1947-11-10
Citations: 164 F.2d 106
Docket Number: No. 9476
Parties: MARTIN v. STAPLES
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 164
Pages: 106–106

Head Matter:
MARTIN v. STAPLES
No. 9476.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia.
Argued Oct. 14, 1947.
Decided Nov. 10, 1947.
Mr. Louis E. Spiegler, of Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Sol M. Alpher, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. John P.' Labofish, of Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Joseph George Dondero, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.
Before EDGERTON, Associate Justice, MARIS, Circuit Judge, and PRETTY-MAN, Associate Justice.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This appeal was taken from a jury's verdict before judgment had been entered. It is therefore premature and must be dismissed. St. Louis Amusement Co. v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp., 8 Cir., 156 F.2d 400; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 58, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. However, we have examined the record and find that the judgment would be affirmed if it were before us. Appellant is the beneficiary of a will which has been denied probate because the jury found that the will had been procured by undue influence, duress, or coercion. Appellant, conceding .that thé definitions of undue influence, duress and coercion in the instructions of the trial judge to the jury were correct, urges that there was no evidence to support the jury's verdict. We find that the evidence was ample.
Appeal dismissed.