Connor

Connor v. United States

Good Law
131 C.C.A. 68·214 F. 522·1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1153
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 4, 1914No. 2240California4,711 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Morrow, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1] 1. A preliminary question arises in these suits with respect to certain assignments of error of the appellants wherein it is alleged that it was error on the part of the trial court to refuse to approve the report of the master in chancery, and to order the bills dismissed as the *526 master recommended, and, further, that the decrees were erroneous, in that, the causes having been tried before the master under a consent agreement, whereby the master was to,try all of the issues and report the same to the court, the District Court had no jurisdiction in the matter, ■ except to examine the testimony and see’if there was any evidence to support the master’s findings, and the testimony being contradictory, and there being evidence in the record to support the master’s findings, the only power or jurisdiction the District Court had was to approve these findings and order the bills dismissed.

The stipulation entered into in each of the causes, between counsel for the respective parties, provided that:

Pursuant to the stipulation an order was entered by the clerk in each case, which provided that:

It is apparent from this stipulation and order…

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.