Legal Opinion
Alaska General Fisheries v. Smith
District Court, D. Alaska
Decided July 13, 1927No. 581-APublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HIRE, District Judge.
The defendant Smith acquired no right of fishery by reason of any homestead location he may have made. Columbia Canning Co. v. Hampton (C. C. A.) 161 F. 60; Columbia Salmon Co. v. Berg, 5 Alaska, 538. And he acquired no right to fish a particular spot, merely because of the permit granted him by the War Department, or his territorial license. Thlinket Packing Co. v. Harris & Co., 5 Alaska, 471.
The defendant Smith testified truthfully, I believe, that in March, 1927, with intention to commence a trap for 1927 fishing, he did some work on shore and two days’ work, more or…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Columbia Canning Co. v. HamptonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908
- Canoe Pass Packing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1921
- Columbia Salmon Co. v. BergDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1916
- Thlinket Packing Co. v. Harris & Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1916
- Harris & Co. v. Thlinket Packing Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1916
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fisher v. EverettDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1945
- General Fish Co. v. MarkleyDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1952
- Miller v. Snug Harbor Packing Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1954