Legal Opinion

Miller v. Yellowstone Irrigation District

Montana Supreme Court

Decided March 7, 1932No. 6,893PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ford

On or about April 1, 1929, plaintiff was employed by the defendant as superintendent of its irrigation system. He served in that capacity until November 1 of that year, when he was discharged. This action was brought in April, 1930, and in his complaint plaintiff sets forth at length that on or about April 1, 1929, defendant, through its duly authorized agents, employed him as superintendent of its canal and irrigation works for a period of one year at the agreed and stipulated salary of $1,800 per year, payable at the rate of $150 per month, and that in pursuance of such employment he…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hancock v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Farrell v. School-District No. 2Michigan Supreme Court · 1893
  3. De Remer v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  4. Stolz v. WellsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
  5. Beissel v. Vermillion Farmers Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Garden City Floral Co. v. HuntMontana Supreme Court · 1953
  2. A. T. Klemens & Son v. Reber Plumbing & Heating Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Wyatt v. School District No. 104, Fergus CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Phelps v. Union Central Life InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Timpano v. Central MT HRDCMontana Supreme Court · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API