Snow v. Hazlewood

181 F. 966, 104 C.C.A. 430
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Snow v. Hazlewood. Read the opinion of the Court — 179 F. 182
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 3, 1910·No. Nos. 2,018, 2,030·Published

Opinion

PARDEE, Circuit Judge.

The petitions for rehearing call our attention to the fact that in the opinion, and decree herein rendered two mistakes • were made in computing, the liability of the Hogg-Swayne Syndicate and R. R. Hazlewood—one, in not deducting from the amount charged in the complainant’s original bill the Keith Ward settlement; and, second, in stating the settlement of the Hogg-Swayne Syndicate for 15 acres as and for the sum of $6,000, instead of $5,000, the actual amount shown by the record. The effect of these two mistakes was to improperly increase the joint liability of the- Hogg-Swayne Syndicate apd R. R. Hazlewood in the sum of $3,500.

To correct these mistakes, we amend the decree heretofore entered in the case, to the effect that said R. R. Hazlewood, J. W. Swayne, R. E. Brooks, E. J. Marshall, W. F: Casey, A. S. Fisher, Sarah J. Campbell, as survivor in community of the estate of W. T. Campbell, deceased, Will C. Hogg and Imá -Hogg, as independent, executors of the estate of James S- Hogg, deceased, and Harris Masterson, be, and they are, hereby condemned to pay the complainants the sum of $18,-327.21, with interest at 6 per cent, from April 6, 1903, in lieu of the sum of $21,827.21. , -

With our decree thus amended, the petitions for rehearing are denied.

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

Snow v. Hazlewood, 181 F. 966, 104 C.C.A. 430 (5th Cir. 1910).

181 F. 966 (Snow v. Hazlewood) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.