Ted Newman v. Hi Hat Elkhorn Coal Company
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Per curiam
Appellee contends that we have misconstrued the opinion of the Court of Appeals of Kentucky which was handed down in the case of Hi Hat Elkhorn Mining Co. v. Ted Newman, 352 S.W.2d 71 and was the basis for our decision. We have reviewed the briefs filed in that case and find that substantially the same arguments were made by appellee’s predecessor in title as were urged upon us by appellee in the present case and it relied on the same authorities. The opinion of the District Court in the case at bar was also cited to the Kentucky Court of Appeals.
We cannot ignore the plain language in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hi Hat Elkhorn Mining Co. v. NewmanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1961
3Cited by4 opinions
- Menendez v. Saks And CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- Godley v. Kentucky Resources Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Menendez v. SaksCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- M. R. Godley v. Kentucky Resources Corporation, M. R. Godley v. Piedmont Land Sales, Inc., Hugh N. Rakes, J. E. Berry, Kentucky Resources Corporation, Clinton Coal Company and W. H. Goff, M. R. Godley v. Piedmont Land Sales, Inc., Hugh Rakes and Clinton Coal Company, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981