The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921. Page: 28
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
272 FEDERAL REPORTER
mer member does not come in contact with this bevel, but, having been
raised by it to the plane of the outer surface of the shoulder on the
trigger, passes directly over that surface into its original position be-
hind the shoulder and in contact with it. While the lower end of the
hammer member that connects with the shoulder on the trigger is
rounded to some extent, in order to present as little area of contact as
possible, and thus avoid friction, yet, this end of the hammer having
been raised to the level of the plane of the outer surface of the shoulder
on the trigger, no bevel on the hammer member is necessary to permit
its return, and the point of contact is the highest point of this rounded
end. Even if this end of the hammer that engages with the trigger
were beveled, to facilitate its return over the beveled part of the trig-
ger to the rear of the shoulder, then we would have the double bevel
of Adams, instead of the single bevel and loose connection of Clark.
For the reasons above stated, the judgment of the District Court,
finding claim 6 of the Wertz patent valid and infringed, and further
finding that defendant's construction does not infringe the Clark pat-
ent, is affirmed.
NEW YORK LIFE INS. CO. v. MASON.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. April 4, 1921.)
1. Witnesses 4=148-Benefciary can testify to conversation with insured in
suit against company.
Rev. Codes Mont. t 7891, cl. 4, as amended by Laws 1913, c. 41, makldng
incompetent as witnesses parties to an action against any person or cor-
poration as to the facts of direct transactions or oral communications
between the proposed witness and the deceased, does not exclude the testi-
mony of the beneficiary under an insurance policy, in an action to recover
the amount of the policy, to a conversation with the insured before his
2. Witnesses 4=19--Statute excluding "communications" of wife refers only
to confidential communications.
Rev. Codes Mont. i 7892, forbidding testimony by a wife without her
husband's consent as to any communication made by one to the other
,during the marriage, though not limited expressly to confidential com-
munications, should be construed as applying only to such communications,
since there is no public policy excluding such testimony further than neces-
sary to guard the marital relation.
[Ed. Note.-For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and
Second Series, Communications.]
3. Witnesses =192-Communications by husband testified to by wife held
not "confidential communications."
In an action on a life insurance policy brought by the wife of insured, in
which the defense was suicide, testimony by the wife to conversations with
her husband shortly before and immediately after the shooting, showing
that the husband was not contemplating suicide and that the shooting
was accidental, are not "confidential communications" and were not in-
admissible under Rev. Codes Mont. f 7892.
[Ed. Note-For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and
Second Series, Confidential Communication.]
4aFor other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Here’s what’s next.
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921., legislative document, 1921; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38843/m1/50/: accessed August 20, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.