Case Name: TEXAS & P. RY. CO. v. GENTRY et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1893-06-27
Citations: 57 F. 422
Docket Number: No. 124
Parties: TEXAS & P. RY. CO. v. GENTRY et al.
Judges: Before PARDEE, Circuit Judge, and LOCKE, District' Judge. McGORMICK, Circuit Judge, recused.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 57
Pages: 422–423

Head Matter:
TEXAS & P. RY. CO. v. GENTRY et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 27, 1893.)
No. 124.
1. Federal Courts — Circuit Court of Appeals — Affirmance by Divided Court.
Where one judge of the circuit court of appeals is disqualified, and the other two are divided in opinion, the decision below must he affirmed.
2. Same — Practice— Bbargument.
In such case, where the cause is one in which the judgment of the circuit court of appeals is not “final,” it is not necessary for that court to order a reargument before a full bench, nor propeb, to certify questions to the supreme court for instructions. '
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Texas.
At Law. Action by May Gentry, Olive Lee Gentry, Thomas M. Gentry, and Mary A. Gentry against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, a corporation created by act of congrgss, for negligence causing the death of Louis D. Gentry. Verdict and judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant brings error.
Affirmed.
T. J. Freeman, (W. M. Alexander, Wm. H. Ciarle, and W. L. Hall, on the brief,) for plaintiff in error.
Chas. J. Evans, for defendants in error.
Before PARDEE, Circuit Judge, and LOCKE, District' Judge. McGORMICK, Circuit Judge, recused.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judges being divided in opinion, the judgment of the circuit court is necessarily affirmed. The case being one in which the judgment of the circuit court of appeals is not final, it is not deemed necessary to order a reargument before a full bench, nor proper to certify questions to the supreme court for instruction. Judgment affirmed, with costs.