Legal Opinion

City of Parsons v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided November 20, 1928No. Nos. 763, 765PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POLLOCK, District Judge.

Tbe above entitled and numbered eases arose out of tbe same set of facts, were heard before tbe same able referee, and are governed by tbe same principles of law. They are now before tbe court on exceptions taken by tbe plaintiff to tbe findings of fact and conclusions of law made by tbe referee, who took tbe evidence, saw the witnesses face to face, beard tbeir testimony, and reported the facts of tbe cases.

In passing, it may be noted, if tbe reference in these eases, made on application of tbe plaintiff and consented to by defendants, is a reference under the statute…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Perley v. County of MuskegonMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Wilkinson CountyMississippi Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Bignell v. CumminsMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Board of County Commissioners v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. In re State Treasurer's SettlementNebraska Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Howard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
  2. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Aberdeen Nat. Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
  3. Queenan v. Maryland Casualty Co.District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API