Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mark P. Friedlander, Jr., Washington, D.C., with whom Mark P. Friedlander
  • Blaine P. Friedlander, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for
  • Ted D. Kuemmerling,
  • Counsel, Washington, D.C., with whom Chester H. Gray,
  • Counsel, Milton D. Korman, Principal
  • Counsel,
  • Hubert B. Pair,
  • Counsel, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mark P. Friedlander, Jr., Washington, D.C., with whom Mark P. Friedlander
  • Blaine P. Friedlander, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for
  • Ted D. Kuemmerling,
  • Counsel, Washington, D.C., with whom Chester H. Gray,
  • Counsel, Milton D. Korman, Principal
  • Counsel,
  • Hubert B. Pair,
  • Counsel, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

Emanuel M. ARNOLD, Appellant, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of "colliding" and of "leaving after colliding" in violation of the Traffic and Motor Vehicle Regulations.

His contention on this appeal is that the court improperly limited his counsel in his cross-examination of the government's witnesses.

We have carefully examined the record and cannot say there was any abuse of discretion in this connection.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

ARNOLD v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
(Feb 2, 1960)