 | New Jersey. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1921 - 664 pages
...reasons applying to count No. 2 apply also to this one. and the question of liability under the contract was one of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court. As to count No. 4. This raises a different question than that in counts 2, 3, 5 and 6. It is a claim... | |
 | Maryland. Court of Appeals, Richard W. Gill, Richard Wordsworth Gill, John Johnson - Law reports, digests, etc - 1830 - 562 pages
...ratification of the acts of Edwards fy Stewart. Whether Donnell did, or did not consent to them was a question of fact for the jury, and not of law, for the court. And if he did acquiesce in them after notice, and the jury had so found, then in point of law it ratified... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1851 - 670 pages
...impeach the finding on another count, however contradictory. R. v. Craddack, 31 — — It is a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the Court, whether two names are idem tonantia, unless they must necessarily sound the same. R. v. Davit, 207... | |
 | Samuel Niles Sweet - Elocution - 1843 - 324 pages
...them. Others make small and comparatively unimportant words too prominent ; thus , " This is a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court, and if the court resume the responsibility of deciding this question, which belongs to the jury and... | |
 | Samuel Niles Sweet - Elocution - 1846 - 340 pages
...them. Others make small and comparatively unimportant words too prominent; thus, " This is a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court, and if the court assume the responsibility o/"deciding this question, which belongs to the jury and... | |
 | Edmund Hatch Bennett, Chauncey Smith - Law reports, digests, etc - 1851 - 680 pages
...and the prosecutor in evidence stated that his name was Trius C. : — Held, that it was a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court, whether the two words were idem sonanlia. Regina v. Davis, 564. 3. Mistake in Impanelling.] Sce NEW... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1906 - 796 pages
...question whether the plaintiff was justified in assuming that the car had stopped for her to alight was one of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court. This presents the sole question for determination. The ordinance requires that cars shall be stopped... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1897 - 796 pages
...the defendant tended to show excessive drinking, which, if true, vitiated the policy. The question was one of fact for the jury, and not of law for the judge. 5. Errors are assigned upon the charge of the court. The sole issue in this case for the determination... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - Law reports, digests, etc - 1862 - 614 pages
...in the line of official duty. (2.) Whether paid into the Treasury of the State or not was a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the Court ; and the Court erred in regarding it as a question of law alone, and charging upon it as such. 6.... | |
 | John William Smith, John Innes Clark Hare, Horace Binney Wallace, John William Wallace - Law reports, digests, etc - 1855 - 1006 pages
...depended upon the sense in which it was made by one party, and understood by the other, and was a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court. This latter branch of the rule, however, only applies when the contract is verbal, for when it is reduced... | |
| |
... a question of fact for the jury, and not of law for the court. 
