Legal Opinion
Austin v. Barrett
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided November 23, 1932No. Civil No. 3274PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLockwood, J.
Sam Barrett, hereinafter called plaintiff, brought two separate suits under sections 790 and 791, Revised Code 1928, the one against Hugh C. Gilbert, then and for some time previously a member of the board of supervisors of Maricopa county, and his official bondsman, Pacific Indemnity Company, a corporation, and the other against A. G. Austin, also a member of such board of supervisors, and his official bondsman, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, a corporation. By stipulation of the parties, since the legal issues involved were identical, the cases were consolidated and tried together.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railroad v. MatthewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- United States v. FinnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Van Dyke v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1915
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. FrohmillerArizona Supreme Court · 1951
- Kerby v. State Ex Rel. FrohmillerArizona Supreme Court · 1945
- Austin v. CampbellArizona Supreme Court · 1962
- Corporation Commission v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United StatesArizona Supreme Court · 1951
- Barbee v. HolbrookArizona Supreme Court · 1962
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.