Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Nepstad

Ninth Circuit

Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Nepstad

36 F.2d 947, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 2305

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 17, 1929

DocketNo. 5706

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 36 F.2d 947 (Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Nepstad) 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

Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Nepstad, 36 F.2d 947, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 2305 (9th Cir. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

This is a companion ease to Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Melin (No. 5671) 36 F.(2d) 907, to which reference is hereby made for a more particular statement of the facts.

The court instructed the jury as to what constituted a commercial orchard substantially as in the ease of Sacramento, etc., v. Nelson (No. 5683) 36 F.(2d) 929, and in the case of Sacramento, etc., v. Haenggi (No. 5678) 36 F.(2d) 923, and therein held erroneous.

Judgment reversed.

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

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

This is a companion ease to Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Melin (No. 5671) 36 F.(2d) 907, to which reference is hereby made for a more particular statement of the facts.

The court instructed the jury as to what constituted a commercial orchard substantially as in the ease of Sacramento, etc., v. Nelson (No. 5683) 36 F.(2d) 929, and in the case of Sacramento, etc., v. Haenggi (No. 5678) 36 F.(2d) 923, and therein held erroneous.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 F.2d 947, 1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 2305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sacramento-suburban-fruit-lands-co-v-nepstad-ca9-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack