Pioche Mines Consolidated, Inc., Ely Valley Mines, Inc., and John Janney v. Helen Dolman

Good Law
336 F.2d 789·1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 4293
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 23, 196418402, 18770, 19005California791 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duniway, J.

These appeals involve matters occurring subsequent to the judgment in the case of Dolman v. Pioche Mines Consolidated, Inc., et al., No. 311 in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Pioche Mines Consolidated, Inc. v. Dolman, 1964, 9 Cir., 333 F.2d 257 , No. 17,709 in this court. On appeal from the judgment and from certain other orders in that case, we reversed in part and affirmed in part, and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

Appellants have filed a document which they entitle Motion for Summary Reversal. Appellees have replied and appellants have answered that reply. In view of the positions taken by the parties, we are of the view that oral argument is not necessary in connection with any of these appeals.

In No. 18,402 the appeal is from the denial of a motion to require the plaintiffs Dolman, et al., to give security, to increase the receiver’s bond, and to stay execution on the judgment. As to the motion to require the giving of security, appellants and appellees are in agreement that the appeal should be dismissed in view of the court’s prior action in No. 17,709.

The two corporations, Pioche Mines Consolidated, Inc. and Ely Valley…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.