Rice v. McGrew

Fifth Circuit

Rice v. McGrew

173 F. 1022, 97 C.C.A. 669, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5136

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 16, 1909

DocketNo. 1,946

StatusPublished

This text of 173 F. 1022 (Rice v. McGrew) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rice v. McGrew, 173 F. 1022, 97 C.C.A. 669, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5136 (5th Cir. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PEB CURIAM.

This case is one for damages on behalf of a minor, a deaf mute, to recover damages from the receivers, operating a sawmill under the appointment and orders of the Circuit Court in the case of Maryland Trust Company v. Kirby Lumber Company, and it is appealed here by the said receivers, complaining of the finding of facts made by the special master. The report of the special master on law and facts seems to have been well considered, and, as it was approved and confirmed by the Circuit Court, we are not disposed to go behind it. The decree of the Circuit Court is therefore affirmed.

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

PEB CURIAM.

This case is one for damages on behalf of a minor, a deaf mute, to recover damages from the receivers, operating a sawmill under the appointment and orders of the Circuit Court in the case of Maryland Trust Company v. Kirby Lumber Company, and it is appealed here by the said receivers, complaining of the finding of facts made by the special master. The report of the special master on law and facts seems to have been well considered, and, as it was approved and confirmed by the Circuit Court, we are not disposed to go behind it. The decree of the Circuit Court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 F. 1022, 97 C.C.A. 669, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rice-v-mcgrew-ca5-1909.