Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Nepstad
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
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.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. NelsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
3Cited by1 opinion
- American Guaranty Co. v. Sunset Realty & Planting Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1944