Sheridan County Electric Co-Op., Inc. v. Ferguson
Montana Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
*557MR. JUSTICE ANGSTMAN,
(concurring in part and dissenting in part) :
I agree that a new trial should be had because plaintiff submitted ample proof to make out a prima facie case for damages sufficient to take the case to the jury.
I disagree with that part of the majority opinion which holds that recovery may be had for damages accruing after March 21, 1949. That was the day when the restraining order for which the bond was given was dissolved. That is the day when it was finally determined that Ferguson was not entitled to the restraining order for which the bond was given. The restraining…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Houghton v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Maier v. LuceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Miles v. EdwardsMontana Supreme Court · 1886
- Bunston v. LabbittMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Irwin v. MorrowAlabama Court of Appeals · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.