Ferguson v. Rutherford
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, Lincoln County. The defendants in this action were A. H. Rutherford, George W. Rutherford and L. J. Iianchett. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. It was error for the court to refuse to allow defendants to cross-examine plaintiff upon the whole contract, the matters pertaining to the crushing and reduction of the ores, and as t’o all. payments made therefor and for freight - money advanced.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, Lincoln County. The defendants in this action were A. H. Rutherford, George W. Rutherford and L. J. Iianchett. The facts are stated in the opinion. I. It was error for the court to refuse to allow defendants to cross-examine plaintiff upon the whole contract, the matters pertaining to the crushing and reduction of the ores, and as t’o all. payments made therefor and for freight - money advanced. A cross-examination is about the only test, certainly the most efficacious one, which the law has yet devised to discover the truth. To…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Garber, J.:
The first count of the complaint in this case, if it states any cause of action, sets forth a general indebitatus assumpsit for work and labor performed for the defendants in crushing and amalgamating for them certain quartz ores. - The answer attempts: first, to deny each allegation of the complaint; and second," to setup that the services were rendered under a special contract that the ores should be worked for twenty dollars per ton, the plaintiff guaranteeing to return to the defendants, in bullion, seventy-five per cent, of the pulp assay, and that such return had…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Walker v. BrownIllinois Supreme Court · 1862
- Jackson v. Feather River & Gibsonville Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Thompson v. RichardsMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Knapp v. SchneiderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1869
- Moffet v. . SackettNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Rush v. FrenchArizona Supreme Court · 1874
- Buckley v. BuckleyNevada Supreme Court · 1877
- Petition of FullerNevada Supreme Court · 1945
- State v. BehiterNevada Supreme Court · 1934
- Blake v. PowellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.