Cascaden v. Dunbar
District Court, D. Alaska
Suit by David H. Cascaden against George F. Dunbar and others. On motion by defendants F. G. Manley and A. C. Rice to set aside the findings, conclusions of law, and decree after mandate on appeal, and on motion by plaintiff to alter, complete, and correct the findings, conclusion, and decree. Decree directed. ' -
1Opinion
*677On the Merits.
This action was commenced on June 11, 1904, was tried before the court, and a decree entered on the 15th day of June, 1906, which decree awarded to the plaintiff, Cascaden, a one-third interest in and to the various mining claims described in the complaint. Thereafter an appeal and cross-appeal were prosecuted to the Circuit Court of Appeals' for the Ninth Circuit, and that court, on the 28th day of October, 1907, reversed the judgment and decree of this court, and in its opinion incorporated the following directions to this court:
“The judgment is reversed, and the cause…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Houston v. McCluneyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1874
- Burns v. DreyfusMississippi Supreme Court · 1891
- G. V. B. Min. Co. v. First Nat. Bank of HaileyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1899
- First Nat. Bank of Hailey v. G. V. B. Min. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Idaho · 1898
- Flack v. GosnellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.