Texas Cannel Coal Co. v. Consumers' Lignite Co.

Fifth Circuit

Texas Cannel Coal Co. v. Consumers' Lignite Co.

173 F. 1022, 97 C.C.A. 669, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5138

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided November 30, 1909·No. No. 1,986·Published

Opinion

PEB CURIAM.

The controversy in this case is over the amount of damages to be recovered for lignite unlawfully removed by the appellant from appellee’s land; the question being whether the trespass was inadvertent or willful. We find that Lowery, the general manager, was the representative of the appellant in determining how far mining operations should be carried on and extended, and it was conceded that he had full knowledge of the trespass committed. See U. S. v. Ute Coal & Coke Co., 158 Fed. 20, 85 C. C. A. 302. The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

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

PEB CURIAM.

The controversy in this case is over the amount of damages to be recovered for lignite unlawfully removed by the appellant from appellee’s land; the question being whether the trespass was inadvertent or willful. We find that Lowery, the general manager, was the representative of the appellant in determining how far mining operations should be carried on and extended, and it was conceded that he had full knowledge of the trespass committed. See U. S. v. Ute Coal & Coke Co., 158 Fed. 20, 85 C. C. A. 302. The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

Texas Cannel Coal Co. v. Consumers' Lignite Co., 173 F. 1022, 97 C.C.A. 669, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5138 (5th Cir. 1909).

Pincite

173 F. 1022 (Texas Cannel Coal Co. v. Consumers' Lignite Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related