Osterman v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.

230 F. 1023, 144 C.C.A. 664
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 28, 1916
DocketNo. 2767
StatusPublished

This text of 230 F. 1023 (Osterman v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Osterman v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co., 230 F. 1023, 144 C.C.A. 664 (9th Cir. 1916).

Opinion

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Montana. L. O. Evans, of Kulte, Mont., W. B. Rodgers, of Anaconda, Mont., and D. Gay Stivers, of Butte, Mont., for defendant in error. On motion of counsel for defendant in error, writ of error dismissed for the noneompliance by the plaintiff in error with the pro visions.of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the rules of practice of this court (150 Fed. xxix, 79 C. C. A. xxix); the plaintiff in error having foiled to file a record thereof and to docket the case by or before the return day required by said rule.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
230 F. 1023, 144 C.C.A. 664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osterman-v-anaconda-copper-mining-co-ca9-1916.