McConnell v. Combination Mining & Milling Co.
Montana Supreme Court
On Rehearing-.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Brantly
It is not. necessary to restate the facts of this case. The statement preceding the opinion delivered on the former hearing (30 Mont. 239, 76 Pac. 191) is entirely sufficient to meet present requirements, except certain inaccuracies therein to which attention is called before taking up a discussion of the merits. In that statement it is said that “the mines of the company were operated until June or August, 1893, when they were closed down and remained closed until June, 1895, when operations were resumed,” etc. In fact, they were closed down until January, 1895. It would not be important to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- MacGinniss v. Boston & Montana Consolidated Copper & Silver Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
- McConnell v. Combination Mining & Milling Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1904
- Coombs v. BarkerMontana Supreme Court · 1905
- Gerry v. Bismarck BankMontana Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by20 opinions
- Holcomb v. ForsythSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Hanson Sheep Co. v. Farmers & Traders' State BankMontana Supreme Court · 1917
- Carr v. KimballAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
- Mayger v. St. Louis Mining & Milling Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1923
- McLaughlin v. CorcoranMontana Supreme Court · 1937
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.