Hale & Norcross G. & S. M. Co. v. Bajazette & Golden Era G. & S. M. Co.

1 Nev. 322
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1865
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Nev. 322 (Hale & Norcross G. & S. M. Co. v. Bajazette & Golden Era G. & S. M. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hale & Norcross G. & S. M. Co. v. Bajazette & Golden Era G. & S. M. Co., 1 Nev. 322 (Neb. 1865).

Opinion

Opinion by

Lewis, C. J.,

full Bench concurring.

A motion for a change of venue having been made in this case by the appellant, and the same having been denied by the Court below, an appeal is taken to this Court.

The affidavits upon which the application for change of venue was made, not showing that an impartial trial cannot be had in Storey County, are not sufficient, under the 21st section of the Practice Act, to entitle appellant to a change of venue, it was therefore properly denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Reios v. Mardis
122 P. 1091 (California Court of Appeal, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Nev. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hale-norcross-g-s-m-co-v-bajazette-golden-era-g-s-m-co-nev-1865.