Legal Opinion

Morgan v. Krook

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 1929No. Civil No. 2845PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcALISTER, J.

This is an action hy J. T. Morgan to recover of Carl Gr. Krook the fees the statute allows a reporter for transcribing his shorthand notes, and from a judgment against him he appeals.

The plaintiff, as official court reporter of the superior court of Mohave county, Arizona, took stenographic notes of the testimony and other proceedings in Rodgers v. Arizona Centennial Mining Company, a civil action tried in that court the latter part of 1923, and in his complaint he alleges that at the special instance and request of Carl G. Krook he prepared a transcript of the testimony and one carbon copy…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blackford v. NeavesArizona Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Deatsch v. FairfieldArizona Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Thomas v. NewcombArizona Supreme Court · 1923
  4. J. H. Mulrein Plumbing Supply Co. v. WalshArizona Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Connett v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1885

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Roberts v. SprayArizona Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Kubby v. HammondArizona Supreme Court · 1948
  3. State Tax Commission v. United Verde Extension Mining Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Julian v. CarpenterArizona Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Russell v. Golden Rule Mining Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1945

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

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

Powered by the Exa API