Webster Bros. Milling Co. v. Bingham
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, in and for the County of Graham. E. W. Lewis, Judge. STATEMENT OP PACTS BY THE COURT. This action grows out of the following facts: The appellant, Webster Brothers Milling Company, an Arizona corporation, was engaged in the business of general milling and the buying and selling of grain and hay at Thatcher, Arizona, during the month of June, 1910, and for some years prior thereto.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, in and for the County of Graham. E. W. Lewis, Judge. STATEMENT OP PACTS BY THE COURT. This action grows out of the following facts: The appellant, Webster Brothers Milling Company, an Arizona corporation, was engaged in the business of general milling and the buying and selling of grain and hay at Thatcher, Arizona, during the month of June, 1910, and for some years prior thereto. W. R. Bingham, one of the partners of the appellees, about June 2, 1910, and Oscar Webster, an officer of appellant, had a conversation…
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
The appellant has made several assignments of error, most of which are too indefinite to call attention of this court to the errors assigned. We think that attorneys bringing cases to this court should be careful to observe that rule of the court which requires that “all assignments of error must distinctly specify each ground of error relied upon, and the particular ruling complained of.” However, we think there is sufficient of substance in the assignments made by the appellant that we are able to examine the record in the following three respects: That the’lower court committed errors (1)…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Pelzer Manufacturing Co. v. Sun Fire OfficeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1892
- Rice v. NixonIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Hall v. PillsburySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Dole v. OlmsteadIllinois Supreme Court · 1864
- Bretz v. DiehlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mac Properties v. Dd DunlapCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2019