Thorndyke

Thorndyke v. Gunnison

Good Law
174 F. 137·3 Alaska Fed. 426·98 C.C.A. 171·1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5162
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 22, 1909No. 1,697California363 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The petition in this case sets forth the changes that have taken place in the office of judge of the District Court of Alaska, Division No. 1, since June 28, 1907, when Judge James Wickersham, then judge of the District Court of Alaska and holding the court of the First division thereof, tried the cause of C. M. Thorndyke et al. v. Alaska Perseverance Mining Company, No. 626A, and made findings of facts and conclusions of law upon which the court entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. The petition also recites orders extending time for the preparation of a bill of exceptions and the proceedings relating to the delay on the part of the plaintiffs in procuring from the stenographer of the court a transcript of the evidence.

It appears, from the return to the order to show cause, that the judgment was entered on June 28, 1907, and the time for settling the bill of exceptions was extended from time to time until March 1, 1908. On February 28, 1908’, *428 a motion for a new trial was filed and submitted to Hon. Royal A. Gunnison, holding the District Court for the said division. This motion was denied by Judge Gunnison on January 11, 1909. In the meantime the plaintiffs appear…

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.