Clark v. Fitzgerald
171 U.S. 92, 18 S. Ct. 941, 43 L. Ed. 87, 1898 U.S. LEXIS 1588
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
.The case is before us on error to the Supreme Court of Montana. It is unnecessary to state its facts in detail, and it is sufficient to say that the answer given to the fourth question in the opinion just filed in Del Monte Mining Co. v. Last Chance Mining Co., ante, 55, compels an affirmance of the judgment.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Clark v. Fitzgerald, 171 U.S. 92, 18 S. Ct. 941, 43 L. Ed. 87, 1898 U.S. LEXIS 1588 (1898).
171 U.S. 92 (Clark v. Fitzgerald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rhodes v. Rhodes
370 P.2d 902 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1962)
Kinzel v. West Park Investment Corporation
330 S.W.2d 792 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1959)
Quilp Gold Mining Co. v. Republic Mines Corp.
165 P. 57 (Washington Supreme Court, 1917)
Anaconda Copper Min. Co. v. Pilot Butte Min. Co.
156 P. 409 (Montana Supreme Court, 1915)
United States v. Cain-Bonness Lumber & Timber Co.
215 F. 212 (W.D. Washington, 1914)
Ajax Gold Mining Co. v. Hilkey
31 Colo. 131 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1903)
State ex rel. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. v. District Court of the Second Judicial District
65 P. 1020 (Montana Supreme Court, 1901)
Parrot Silver & Copper Co. v. Heinze
64 P. 326 (Montana Supreme Court, 1901)
St. Louis Min. & Mill. Co. v. Montana Min. Co.
104 F. 664 (Ninth Circuit, 1900)