Legal Opinion

Forrester v. Boston & Montana Consolidated Copper & Silver Mining Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1905No. 1,697PublishedCited by 1 opinion

On Motion eor Rehearing.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Milburn

This case has come before us on motion for rehearing, the former opinion appearing in 30 Mont. 181, 16 Pac. 2.

After consideration of the motion for rehearing the same is denied, a rehearing not being necessary. But of our own motion we have taken the case up for reconsideration, and we have concluded that the decision and opinion rendered after the original hearing, and referred to above, should be modified. The only point in the motion for rehearing worthy of consideration is that made as to the compensation of the receiver.

In the former opinion we said: “Inasmuch as the receiver should have…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Knight v. RussCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Forrester & MacGinniss v. Boston & Montana Consol. Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Hickey v. Parrot Silver & Copper Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Forrester & MacGinniss v. Boston & Montana Consol. Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
  5. State ex rel. Baker v. Second Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1900

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State Ex Rel. Rankin v. Farmers State BankMontana Supreme Court · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API