Thomas v. South Butte Mining Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
.Petition for Order Directing the District Court of the United States for the District of Montana to Receive and Consider Bill of Review. Suit in equity by the South Butte Mining Company against Thomas D. Thomas. Decree for complainant affirmed. 211 Fed. 10S, 128 C. C. A. 33. On application by defendant for an order directing the District Court for the District of Montana to receive and consider a bill of review.
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERT, Circuit Judge.
[1] On February 2, 1914, this court affirmed on appeal the decree of the court below in Thomas v. South Butte Mining Company, Appellee, 211 Fed. 105, 128 C. C. A. 33, and thereafter the mandate of this court was issued to the court below. The appellant now presents to this coui't a petition for leave to file in the court below a bill of review for the purpose of setting aside and annulling the decree so entered'’in that court upon the mandate from this court. As was said by Judge Severens in Keith v. Alger, 124 Fed. 32, 59 C. C. A. 552:
“A bill oí review is a dernier…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Shaw v. Quincy Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Purcell v. MinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- McCloskey v. Pacific Coast Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908
- Purcell v. MinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Kimberly v. ArmsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio · 1889
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ross-Whitney Corp. v. Smith Kline & French LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Obear-Nester Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
- Canon v. RobertsonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1929
- Nyberg v. Montgomery Ward & Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1954
- Kelley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929