LENA S. WALTON ET AL., PETITIONERS,

v.

WILD GOOSE MINING AND TRADING COMPANY

Citator

Cited By

• Tinkoff v. United States, 86 F.2d 868 (7th Cir. 1936)
  …. There is no showing of any abuse of discretion and no error is suggested by the record. Liverpool & L. & G. Ins. Co. v. N. & M. Friedman Co., 133 F. 713 (C. C.A.6); Walton v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co., 123 F. 209 (C.C.A.9), certiorari denied 194 U.S. 631, 24 S.Ct. 856, 48 L.Ed. 1158. Appellant insists that the jury read the daily newspapers containing articles prejudicial to him. The affidavits presented in this respect show that the publications were merely matter-of-fact news items, reporting onl…
• MAY v. United States, 175 F.2d 994 (D.C. Cir. 1949)
  …238, 82 F. 2d 837, 844, certiorari denied, 1936, 298 U.S. 655, 56 S.Ct. 675, 80 L.Ed. 1382; United States v. McDonald, D.C.Minn.1923, 293 F. 433, 441; Walton v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co., 9 Cir., 1903, 123 F. 209, 221, certiorari denied, 1904, 194 U.S. 631, 24 S.Ct. 856, 48 L.Ed. 1158. 1940, 71 App.D.C. 394, 110 F. 2d 556. It is to be noted that the Sugar case, like the instant case, involved Section 88 of Title 18, 35 Stat. 1096, and that the Court of Appeals in deciding the Sugar case implied that…
• Elisabeth M. Byrne v. Matczak, 254 F.2d 525 (3d Cir. 1958)
  …re Ins. Co. of Pennsylvania v. Central Glass Co., 5 Cir., 1912, 194 F. 851; Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co. v. N. & M. Friedman Co., 6 Cir., 1904, 133 F. 713; Walton v. Wild Goose Mining & Trading Co., 9 Cir., 1903, 123 F. 209, certiorari denied 194 U.S. 631, 24 S.Ct. 856, 48 L.Ed. 1158. True, the allowance of a dispersal is contrary to the old common law. And there is, in Dimick v. Schiedt, 1935, 293 U.S. 474, 55 S.Ct. 296, 79 L.Ed. 603, strong language to the effect that the Seventh Amendment perpetu…