Smith v. Naphtaly

Decided February 3, 1896.)

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1896-02-03

<p>Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California.</p> <p>This was a bill in equity by Joseph Naphtaly and others against Josiah S. Smith to recover certain lands. A demurrer to the bill was sustained by the circuit court, and a decree entered accordingly. Defendant appealed.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1921

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on St.louis Smelting and Refining Company v. Kemp. · Steel v. St Louis Smelting Refining · Barden v. Northern Pac R Co

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Erskine Mayo Ross · Decided 1896-02-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Public Lands.

¶2Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California.

¶3This was a bill in equity by Joseph Naphtaly and others against Josiah S. Smith to recover certain lands. A demurrer to the bill was sustained by the circuit court, and a decree entered accordingly. Defendant appealed.

¶4H. F. Crane and Philip Teare, for appellant.

¶5A. L. Rhodes, for appellees.

¶6Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and MORROW, District Judge.

¶7ROSS, Circuit Judge.

¶8From the action of the court below in sustaining a demurrer to the bill in this case, the complainant appealed. The merits of the case are covered by the decision in the case of Beley v. Naphtaly (just filed) 73 Fed. 120. It is not necessary to do more than to refer to the reasons there given in support of our judgment affirming that of the court below. Judgment affirmed.