Home Insurance v. Pinski Bros.

Montana Supreme Court

Home Insurance v. Pinski Bros.

468 P.2d 763, 155 Mont. 534, 1970 Mont. LEXIS 397

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedMay 1, 1970

DocketNo. 11869

StatusPublished

This text of 468 P.2d 763 (Home Insurance v. Pinski Bros.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Home Insurance v. Pinski Bros., 468 P.2d 763, 155 Mont. 534, 1970 Mont. LEXIS 397 (Mo. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth K. Knight and A. Andrew van Teylingen, co-partners, doing business as Knight & van Teylingen, and Kenneth [535]*535K. Knight having moved and applied to this Court for certain orders under a motion and application entitled “Affidavit, Motion to Stay, and Application for Writ of Supervisory Control (or other Appropriate Relief) Staying District Court Proceedings Herein until Determination of Appeal, and for Order Directing Plaintiff and the DISTRICT Court to Appear and Participate in Appeal Proceedings Involving Identical Pacts, Issues and Matters,” and the Court having heard argument ex parte and having taken the matter under advisement and given consideration to the contentions of the movants and being now advised in the premises.

It is ordered that the relief sought be denied, without prejudice.

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

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth K. Knight and A. Andrew van Teylingen, co-partners, doing business as Knight & van Teylingen, and Kenneth [535]*535K. Knight having moved and applied to this Court for certain orders under a motion and application entitled “Affidavit, Motion to Stay, and Application for Writ of Supervisory Control (or other Appropriate Relief) Staying District Court Proceedings Herein until Determination of Appeal, and for Order Directing Plaintiff and the DISTRICT Court to Appear and Participate in Appeal Proceedings Involving Identical Pacts, Issues and Matters,” and the Court having heard argument ex parte and having taken the matter under advisement and given consideration to the contentions of the movants and being now advised in the premises.

It is ordered that the relief sought be denied, without prejudice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

468 P.2d 763, 155 Mont. 534, 1970 Mont. LEXIS 397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/home-insurance-v-pinski-bros-mont-1970.