Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Galloway v. United States

• 1942 • 319 U.S. 372 • Stone Court
In Galloway v. United States (1942), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the Seventh Amendment, which guarantees a trial by jury in civil cases. The plaintiff, Galloway, had sued for damages claiming that he was wrongfully committed to an insane asylum by government officials. After hearing evidence from both sides during the trial, the judge directed a verdict in favor of the defendants without letting it go to jury deliberation because he believed no reasonable juror could find...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Stone Court
Term: 1942
Docket: 553
319 U.S. 372
63 S. Ct. 1077
87 L. Ed. 1458
1943 U.S. LEXIS 1118
Argued: Mar 09, 1943

Galloway v. United States

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Galloway v. United States (1942), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the Seventh Amendment, which guarantees a trial by jury in civil cases. The plaintiff, Galloway, had sued for damages claiming that he was wrongfully committed to an insane asylum by government officials. After hearing evidence from both sides during the trial, the judge directed a verdict in favor of the defendants without letting it go to jury deliberation because he believed no reasonable juror could find for Galloway based on presented evidence. Galloway appealed this decision arguing that his Seventh Amendment rights were violated as he was denied his right to have his case decided by a jury rather than solely by a judge's interpretation of law and facts. The Supreme Court upheld lower court’s ruling stating that judges do not violate litigants' constitutional rights when they direct verdicts if there is insufficient evidence upon which any reasonable person could base their judgment against other party involved in lawsuit. This landmark decision clarified judicial power over directing verdicts and affirmed judges’ authority to prevent unnecessary or pointless trials where there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for rational jurors’ decisions.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Galloway v. United States, Justice Black argued that the majority's decision undermined a fundamental right of American citizens - the right to a trial by jury. He contended that this case was not about whether there was enough evidence for a reasonable person to find guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but rather if there was any evidence at all which could lead to such conclusion. According to him, it is up to juries and not judges or appellate courts, no matter how clear they believe the facts are against defendant’s favor, to decide on matters of fact in criminal cases. The judge's role should be limited only as an advisor and guide regarding law interpretation while leaving factual determinations solely with jurors who represent community sentiment and standards.

Opinion written by Justice WBRutledge
Decided: May 24, 1943
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms