v. Ray

Decision Date01 October 1881
Citation26 L.Ed. 882,104 U.S. 657
PartiesSt. Louis Smelting & Refining Co. v. RAY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

NOTE.—Smelting Company v. Ray, error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado, was argued at the same time as the preceding case, and by the same counsel for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Thomas M. Patterson for the defendants in error.

MR. JUSTICE FIELD remarked that, as it presented the same questions there determined, the judgment of the court below must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissented.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Stroup v. Matthews
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • April 4, 1927
  • Brokken v. Baumann
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • November 14, 1901
    ...in a proceeding properly before them. Such finding will not be disturbed. Parsons v. Venske, 4 N.D. 451 and 469; St. Louis Smelting Co. v. Kemp, 104 U.S. 657; Minter v. Crommelin, 18 How. 87; Bangnell Broderick, 13 Pet. 448. The fact that the wife does not reside on the place is immaterial.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT