GUIMARAIS' Appeal.¹
CARACO'S APPEAL.

Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

April 22, 1886.

ADMIRALTY—APPEAL—EVIDENCE.

When, on an appeal, the questions involved are exclusively questions of fact, dependent upon conflicting testimony, the court will not discuss the evidence to enforce its views with reference to its weight and credibility.

In Admiralty.

John G. Johnson, for libelant and appellant.

Charles Gibbons, for respondent and appellant.

MCKENNAN, J. As the sum in controversy in each of these cases does not appear, by the record, to entitle either of the parties to an appeal, it is unnecessary for this court to make a detailed finding of facts; and as the questions involved in the cases are exclusively questions of fact, dependent upon conflicting testimony, it would not be profitable to discuss the evidence to enforce the views of the court in reference to its weight and credibility. It is sufficient to say that no error is discovered in the conclusions of the district court upon it, and the decree of that court, in each case, is affirmed, with costs.

¹ Reported by C. B. Taylor, Esq., of the Philadelphia bar.

This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet
through a contribution from Google.