Kingsbury v. Pacific Coal & Transp. Co.
District Court, D. Alaska
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, District Judge.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal from the commissioner’s court for Nome precinct,.Alaska. Three grounds are urged in the motion, but the last two are in effect the same as the first, which is “that said notice fails to specify with sufficient identity the judgment appealed from.” By way of argument, counsel for appellant also claim that as the respondent, by his attorney, has made the motion to dismiss the appeal, and has not in words declared his appearance a special one for the purpose of the motion only, such an appearance is a general one, and respondent has…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Joy v. StumpOregon Supreme Court · 1887
- United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Weyl v. Sonoma Valley R.R.California Supreme Court · 1886
- Crawford v. WistOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- State v. HanlonOregon Supreme Court · 1897
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Frizzell v. RyanDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1920
- Markuson v. ClarkDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1912
- Paddy v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1950