Mazon Estate, Inc. v. Carr
New Mexico Supreme Court
Action on an injunction bond by the Mazon Estate, Incorporated, against Clark M. Carr and T. A. Godding, partners doing business under the firm name of Carr-Godding Sheep Company, and others. Judgment for defendants on a directed verdict, and plaintiff appeals. Evidence shows attorney’s fees were incurred in ancillary injunction proceeding.
Read the full summary
Action on an injunction bond by the Mazon Estate, Incorporated, against Clark M. Carr and T. A. Godding, partners doing business under the firm name of Carr-Godding Sheep Company, and others. Judgment for defendants on a directed verdict, and plaintiff appeals. Evidence shows attorney’s fees were incurred in ancillary injunction proceeding. Webb' v. Beal, 20 N. M. 218; Woods v. Fambrough, 24 N. M. 488; Wittieh v. O’Neil, 22 Fla. 592; Hyatt v. Washington, 15 N. E. 248; 22 Cyc. 1053; Littleton v. Burgess,, 91 Pac. 832; Ferrell v. Transportation Co., 157 Pac. 946; Anderson v. Trust Co., 66 Pac.…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OP THE COURT.
ROBERTS, J.
This was an action on an injunction bond against the prinicipals and sureties thereon to recover damages for expenses and attorneys’ fees incurred by the alleged wrongful suing out of the writ. The court directed a verdict for the defendants in the court below (appellees here), which is assigned as error. ' Several grounds were set forth in the motion for a directed verdict, and all will be omitted here except what we conceive to be the controlling question in the case.
Clark M. Carr and T. F. Godding, partners doing business under the name of Carr-Godding Sheep…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wittich v. O'NealSupreme Court of Florida · 1886
- Webb v. BealNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
- Hyatt v. City of WashingtonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
- Markle v. RobertsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1863
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tatavich v. PettineNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1926