Legal Opinion

Pyott Land & Mining Co. v. Tarwater

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1912PublishedCited by 8 opinions

FROM ROANE. Appeal from tlie Oliancery Court of Roane Conntv.— Hugh G-. Kyle, Chancellor.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Neil

This action, as it now stands before the court, is on an appeal of the complainant from a judgment of the chancery court of Roane county against it and its sureties on its injunction bond for $1,000, the penalty of the bond, and against complainant for $917.80 in excess of the bond; also upon writ of error 'sued out by defendants Tarwater and the Brown Mining Company, because of *603the refusal of the chancellor to render judgment for addition damages against the complainant much in excess of the $917.80, amounting, in fact, to several thousand dollars.

The original controversy arose over a lease…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Meyers v. BlockSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Hayden v. KeithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
  3. Robinson v. KellumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  4. Glen Jean, Lower Loup & D. R. v. Kanawha, Glen Jean & E. R.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Manlove v. VickMississippi Supreme Court · 1878

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Wright Medical Technology, Inc. v. GrisoniCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2001
  2. H. P. Rieger & Co. v. KnightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
  3. Nashville Union Stockyards, Inc. v. GrissimCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1930
  4. Miller Surfacing Co. v. BridgersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
  5. Hawkins v. HubbellTennessee Supreme Court · 1912

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API