Legal Opinion
Greenberg v. Lesamis
District Court, D. Alaska
Decided February 14, 1914No. 2349Published
1Opinion of the Court
TUCKER, District Judge.
The court is asked to reopen this case on a second motion for a new trial, but I can see no justification for doing so. Neither section 1057, nor any other section of the Alaska law, provides for any such second motion, and section 925 has no application to this case.
In the case of Kentucky Central R. Co. v. Smith, 93 Ky. 449, 20 S. W. 392, 18 L. R. A. 67, and Lookabaugh v. Cooper, 5 Okl. 102, 48 Pat. 99, this question is discussed and decided with reference to-a statute similar to section 1057, and I think the decisions in those cases lay down the correct rule or…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mt. Adams & E. P. Inclined Ry. Co. v. LoweryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Big Brushy Coal & Coke Co. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1910
- Lookabaugh v. CooperSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
- Kentucky Central Railway Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1892
- Humel v. HoogendornDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1914