Imperial Refining Co. v. Wyman
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio
At Law.
1Opinion of the CourtHammond, J.
The plaintiff’s declaration or petition avers that it is an incorporation duly- organized under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, and that the defendants are citizens of the state of Ohio. The answer admits that the defendants are citizens of Ohio, *575but otherwise “denies eacb and every allegation and averment of the said petition not above specifically admitted.” It is conceded that under the practice in Ohio this general denial puts in issue the averments of the petition as to the incorporation, and'under it the defendant has offered proof, subject to the exception of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Dred Scott v. SandfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
- Barry v. EdmundsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Philadelphia, Wilmington, & Baltimore Railroad v. QuigleySupreme Court of the United States · 1859
- Williams v. NottawaSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of PawletSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hill v. WalkerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
- McEldowney v. CardU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Tennessee · 1911
- State of Virginia v. FeltsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Virginia · 1904
- National Masonic Acc. Ass'n v. SparksCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
- Desert King Min. Co. v. WedekindU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1901
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.