Nisbet v. Clio Mining Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County, and from orders refusing to set the judgment aside, and refusing to retax costs. G. W. Nicol, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
McLAUGHLIN J.
There are three appeals in this case: (1) From the judgment; (2) from an order refusing to set the judgment aside; (3) from an order refusing to retax the costs. It appears that two companies, the Clio Mining Company, organized and existing under the laws of the state of Maine, and the Clio Mining and Milling Company, organized under the laws of the state of New Jersey, were in existence and had been doing business in Tuolumne county. The former owned and was operating the Clio mine, while the latter had no connection with said mine. When this action was commenced, an attachment…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Simon v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Security Loan & Trust Co. v. Boston & South Riverside Fruit Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
- In re ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Underhill v. Santa Barbara Land, Building, & Improvement Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Chattanooga, Rome & Columbus Railroad v. JacksonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Stephens v. BerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Bayle-Lacoste & Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Hernaiz Targa & Co. v. VivasSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1914
- Thompson v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Smith v. Pickwick Stages SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.