Mammoth Mining Co. v. Salt Lake Foundry & MacHine Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
•APPEAL FROM THE SOTEEME COÜET OE THE" TERRITORY OF UTAH. Taylor and another, brought suit against the Mammoth Mining Company in the District Court of the First Judicial District of Utah Territory to foreclose a mechanics’ lien under the statute of Utah in that behalf, and the Salt Lake Foundry and Machine Company, having been made a party defendant, filed its cross complaint therein against its codefendant, the Mammoth Mining Company, for the enforcement of a similar lien…
Read the full summary
•APPEAL FROM THE SOTEEME COÜET OE THE" TERRITORY OF UTAH. Taylor and another, brought suit against the Mammoth Mining Company in the District Court of the First Judicial District of Utah Territory to foreclose a mechanics’ lien under the statute of Utah in that behalf, and the Salt Lake Foundry and Machine Company, having been made a party defendant, filed its cross complaint therein against its codefendant, the Mammoth Mining Company, for the enforcement of a similar lien for materials furnished and work done in and about the construction of certain buildings of the mining company, and…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Fuller
1. This proceeding to enforce a mechanics’ lien under the statute of the Territory of Utah was in the nature of a suit in equity, and was tried by the court without a jury. The Supreme Court, in affirming the judgment, has determined • that the findings of the trial court- were justified by the evidence, and, apart from exceptions duly taken to rulings on the admission or rejection of evidence, our examination is limited to the inquiry, 'without reference to the weight of evidence or its sufficiency to support the special findings, whether the decree can be sustained upon those findings.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bank of United States v. DandridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Idaho & Oregon Land Improvement Co. v. BradburySupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Stringfellow v. CainSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Bronson's v. ChappellSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Mining Co. v. Anglo-Californian BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
3Cited by23 opinions
- Bear Lake & River Water Works & Irrigation Co. v. GarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Harrison v. PereaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Grayson v. LynchSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- De La Rama v. De La RamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Haws v. Victoria Copper Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.