Legal Opinion
Martin v. Burford
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 7, 1910No. 1,712PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MORROW, Circuit Judge.
The defendants in error have appeared specially and interposed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, and *438on the further ground that the court is without jurisdiction of the persons of the defendants in error George C. Bur-ford, Jules B. Caro, and Charles -E. Hooker, or the partnership doing business under the firm name and style of J. B. Caro & Co., for the reason that the citation issued there was never served on George C. Burford, or Jules B. Caro, or Charles E. Hooker, or the partnership of J. B. Caro…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Estis v. TrabueSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Jacobs v. GeorgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Knickerbocker Life Insurance v. PendletonSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Tripp v. Santa Rosa Street RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Altenberg v. GrantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Henderson v. Richardson Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1928
- Crescent Wharf & Warehouse Co. v. PillsburyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
- Gilbert v. HopkinsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1912
- Browning v. BoswellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1913
- Sutherland v. PearceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1911