Legal Opinion
Bullen v. Bretteville
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 31, 1956No. 14897PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
BARNES, Circuit Judge.
We will consider the intervenors’ appeal first.
Appellants Bullen and Hayward and their respective wives, intervenors, appeal from that part of the judgment which denied enforcement of the “two for one agreement,” by reason of which they sought payment, out of funds held by the court as a condemnation award, of the sum of $5,000, which they had advanced in equal shares of $2,500 each, for the completion of an oil well, known as Treasure Well No. 8.
Treasure Company, a corporation of which de Bretteville was President, as lessee of certain property in Los Ange-les County,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Callahan v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Cole v. RalphSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Welch v. Tennessee Valley AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
- Albertson v. Federal Communications Commission (Dunkirk Broadcasting Corporation, Intervenor)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.