SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY

v.

HUGH PETIT ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. EL Pomar Inv. Co., 330 F.2d 872 (10th Cir. 1964)
  …d States, 6 Cir., 174 F. 2d 754, 767; Miller v. Kansas City Light & Power Co., 8 Cir., 13 F. 2d 723, 729. . Brooks v. Marbury, 11 Wheat 78, 24 U.S. 78, 90, 6 L.Ed. 423; Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. North American Tel. Co., 8 Cir., 230 F. 347, 355, c.d. 249 U.S. 607, 39 S.Ct. 290, 63 L.Ed. 799; Evans v. Victor, 8 Cir., 204 F. 361, 367; Kling v. Kansas City, 227 Mo.App. 1248, 61 S.W. 2d 411, 414; Wermeling v. Wermeling, 224 Ky. 107, 5 S.W. 2d 893, 897. . It owned a sugar factory capable of slicing approximately…
• United States v. Waterhouse, 132 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1943)
  …s easily seen why values arrived at by that method could not be conclusive. Yet, capitalization of rental value is evidence of the market value of the land. North American Telegraph Co. v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 8 Cir., 254 F. 417, certiorari denied 249 U.S. 607, 39 S.Ct. 290, 63 L.Ed. 799; United States v. Shingle, 9 Cir., 91 F. 2d 85, 89, certiorari [*703] denied 302 U.S. 746, 58 S.Ct. 264, 82 L.Ed. 577. Appellant’s argument is based on the assumption that appellees’ witnesses were testifying as to what…
• Lamprecht v. Swiss Oil Corp., 32 F.2d 646 (6th Cir. 1929)
  …nds. This proposition is, we think, fully sustained by considered court decisions under analogous situations, as well as by standard text-writers. North American Telegraph Co. v. Northern Pac. R. Co. (C. C. A. 8) 254 F. 417, 418; (certiorari denied, 249 U. S. 607, 39 S. Ct 290, 63 L. Ed. 799); Walter v. Duffy (C. C. A. 3) 287 F. 41, 45, 48; Chamberlayne on Evidence, §§ 2099h, 2099i; Holmes, Fed. Taxes (1923 Ed.) pp. 510-513, Cf. Clinton, etc., Co., v. Jamison (C. C. A. 3) 256 F. 577; Phillips v. United State…