Legal Opinion

Halleck v. Bresnahen

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 1883PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from district court, Albany county. Action by one Bresnahen against Hal-leck Bros, on a bond given for the performance of a building contract made by Dawson & Hawes. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.

1Opinion of the CourtParks, J.

In this case the defendant in error filed his motion to dismiss the writ of error, and supported it by a number of points, arguments, and authorities. The third point made .and insisted on is that the plaintiff in error did not file with the clerk of this court printed abstracts of the record at the time, in the manner, and in the form required by law. The statute of this territory provides that the rules of practice of this court shall be as binding upon the several courts, and the parties practicing and having business therein, as though the same were enactments of the legislative authority…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Ex parte ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Schaidt v. BlaulCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1886
  3. Slocumb v. C., B. & Q. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1882
  4. Georgia Pacific Railway Co. v. StricklandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  5. Leonard v. FlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Cronkhite v. BothwellWyoming Supreme Court · 1892
  2. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. ParkerWyoming Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Phillips v. BrillWyoming Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Leonard v. Home BuildersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Yellowstone Sheep Co. v. Diamond Dot Live Stock Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1931

2 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