Skip to content


St. Louis Smelting and Refining Co. Vs. Ray - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number104 U.S. 657
AppellantSt. Louis Smelting and Refining Co.
RespondentRay
Excerpt:
st. louis smelting & refining co. v. ray - 104 u.s. 657 (1881) u.s. supreme court st. louis smelting & refining co. v. ray, 104 u.s. 657 (1881) 104 u.s. 657 104 u.s. 657 st. louis smelting & refining co. v. ray october term, 1881 note.-smelting company v. ray, error to the circuit court of the united states for the district of colorado, was argued at the same time as the preceding case, and by the same counsel for the plaintiff in error, and by mr. thomas m. patterson for the defendants in error. mr. justice field remarked that, as it presented the same questions there determined, the judgment of the court below must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. mr. justice miller and mr. justice harlan dissented.[ st. louis.....
Judgment:
ST. LOUIS SMELTING & REFINING CO. v. RAY - 104 U.S. 657 (1881)
U.S. Supreme Court ST. LOUIS SMELTING & REFINING CO. v. RAY, 104 U.S. 657 (1881)

104 U.S. 657 104 U.S. 657

St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.
v.
RAY

October Term, 1881

NOTE.-Smelting Company v. Ray, error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Colorado, was argued at the same time as the preceding case, and by the same counsel for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Thomas M. Patterson for the defendants in error.

MR. JUSTICE FIELD remarked that, as it presented the same questions there determined, the judgment of the court below must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissented.[ St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co. v. Ray 104 U.S. 657 (1881) ]


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //