Legal Opinion
Hinchman v. Ripinsky
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 13, 1913No. Nos. 1,993, 2,015, and 2,045PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOLVERTON, District Judge.
This is the second appeal. The cause was reversed on the first, and remanded for such further proceedings as to the trial court might seem proper. The District Court allowed an amendment of the complaint in such manner as to show that the suit was instituted in support of an adverse claim, entered in the Land Office, to the application of the defendant, Solomon Ripinsky, for a homestead patent in pursuance of survey No. 573. A new trial was had, 'resulting in a decree that plaintiffs take nothing by the bill of complaint; that defendant is the owner of the following…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Northwestern Fuel Co. v. BrockSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Perego v. DodgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Ashby v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Martin v. HoffArizona Supreme Court · 1901
- Ripinsky v. HenchmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1910
3Cited by3 opinions
- Coker & Bellamy v. RicheyOregon Supreme Court · 1923
- United States v. 10.95 Acres of Land in JuneauDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1948
- Oswald v. COLUMBIA LUMBER COMPANY OF ALASKAAlaska Supreme Court · 1967