Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Montana ., Volume 32

Montana. Supreme Court, .

Published by Ulan Press
Used / Quantity Available: 0
Available From More Booksellers
View all  copies of this book

About the Book

We're sorry; this specific copy is no longer available. Here are our closest matches for Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Montana ., Volume 32.

Description:

B00ALQYGZ8 Used good or better, we ship best copy available! May have signs of use, may be ex library copy. Book Only. Expedited shipping is 2-6 business days after shipment, standard is 4-14 business days after shipment. Used items do not include access codes, cd's or other accessories, regardless of what is stated in item title. If you need to guarantee that these items are included, please purchase a brand new copy. Bookseller Inventory #

Bibliographic Details

Title: Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in ...
Publisher: Ulan Press


Book Condition: Good

Top Search Results from the AbeBooks Marketplace

1.

Published by Book on Demand, Miami (2016)
ISBN 10: 5875433760 ISBN 13: 9785875433764
New Perfect binding Quantity Available: > 20
Print on Demand
Seller
TRANSMEDIA HOLDING
(Key Biscayne, FL, U.S.A.)
Rating
[?]

Book Description Book on Demand, Miami, 2016. Perfect binding. Book Condition: NEW. Dust Jacket Condition: NEW. 5.8" x 8.3". In English language. This book, "Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Montana ., Volume 32", is a replication. It has been restored by human beings, page by page, so that you may enjoy it in a form as close to the original as possible. This item is printed on demand. Thank you for supporting classic literature. SOFT COVER. Bookseller Inventory # 1317137

More Information About This Seller | Ask Bookseller a Question

Buy New
US$ 45.90
Convert Currency

Add to Basket

Shipping: US$ 3.50
Within U.S.A.
Destination, Rates & Speeds

2.

Books Group
Published by Rarebooksclub.com, United States (2012)
ISBN 10: 1231012374 ISBN 13: 9781231012376
New Paperback Quantity Available: 10
Print on Demand
Seller
The Book Depository US
(London, United Kingdom)
Rating
[?]

Book Description Rarebooksclub.com, United States, 2012. Paperback. Book Condition: New. 246 x 189 mm. Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****. This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 Excerpt: .to see the witnesses and observe their demeanor while testifying; and, on the evidence, we are not able to say that he reached an erroneous conclusion. In Crawford v. Neal, 144 U. S. 585, 12 Sup. Ct. 759, 36 L. Ed. 552, the same rule is announced as follows: The cause was referred to a master to take testimony therein, and to report to this court his findings of fact and his conclusions of law thereon. This he did, and the court, after a review of the evidence, concurred in his findings and conclusions. Clearly, then, they are to be taken as presumptively correct, and unless some obvious error has intervened in the application of the law, or some serious or important mistake has been made in the consideration of the evidence, the decree should be permitted to stand. To the same efl ect is the decision in Warren v. Keep, 155 U. S. 265, 15 Sup. Ct. 83, 39 L. Ed. 144, where it is said: There was a considerable amount of this evidence, and it was to some extent conflicting. The master acted in view of this evidence, and the court below concurred in his finding, except in some unimportant particulars. As no obvious error or mistake has been pointed out to us, their conclusion must be permitted to stand. It is true that a different rule is promulgated by some of the courts. For instance, in Oregon it is said that the decision of the lower court will only be consulted for the purpose of resolving a doubt which may arise from the conflicting and contradictory nature of the evidence. (Nessley v. Ladd, 29 Ore. 354, 45 Pac. 904, and cases cited.) But we prefer to adopt the other view, and hold that it is incumbent upon the appellant to show that the preponderance of the evidence is against the findings of the tria. Bookseller Inventory # APC9781231012376

More Information About This Seller | Ask Bookseller a Question

Buy New
US$ 57.68
Convert Currency

Add to Basket

Shipping: FREE
From United Kingdom to U.S.A.
Destination, Rates & Speeds

3.

Published by RareBooksClub
ISBN 10: 1231012374 ISBN 13: 9781231012376
New Paperback Quantity Available: 20
Print on Demand
Seller
BuySomeBooks
(Las Vegas, NV, U.S.A.)
Rating
[?]

Book Description RareBooksClub. Paperback. Book Condition: New. This item is printed on demand. Paperback. 272 pages. Dimensions: 9.7in. x 7.4in. x 0.6in.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 Excerpt: . . . to see the witnesses and observe their demeanor while testifying; and, on the evidence, we are not able to say that he reached an erroneous conclusion. In Crawford v. Neal, 144 U. S. 585, 12 Sup. Ct. 759, 36 L. Ed. 552, the same rule is announced as follows: The cause was referred to a master to take testimony therein, and to report to this court his findings of fact and his conclusions of law thereon. This he did, and the court, after a review of the evidence, concurred in his findings and conclusions. Clearly, then, they are to be taken as presumptively correct, and unless some obvious error has intervened in the application of the law, or some serious or important mistake has been made in the consideration of the evidence, the decree should be permitted to stand. To the same eflect is the decision in Warren v. Keep, 155 U. S. 265, 15 Sup. Ct. 83, 39 L. Ed. 144, where it is said: There was a considerable amount of this evidence, and it was to some extent conflicting. The master acted in view of this evidence, and the court below concurred in his finding, except in some unimportant particulars. As no obvious error or mistake has been pointed out to us, their conclusion must be permitted to stand. It is true that a different rule is promulgated by some of the courts. For instance, in Oregon it is said that the decision of the lower court will only be consulted for the purpose of resolving a doubt which may arise from the conflicting and contradictory nature of the evidence. (Nessley v. Ladd, 29 Ore. 354, 45 Pac. 904, and cases cited. ) But we prefer to adopt the other view, and hold that it is incumbent upon the appellant to show that the preponderance of the evidence is against the findings of the tria. . . This item ships from La Vergne,TN. Paperback. Bookseller Inventory # 9781231012376

More Information About This Seller | Ask Bookseller a Question

Buy New
US$ 53.74
Convert Currency

Add to Basket

Shipping: US$ 3.95
Within U.S.A.
Destination, Rates & Speeds

4.

Books Group
Published by Rarebooksclub.com, United States (2012)
ISBN 10: 1231012374 ISBN 13: 9781231012376
New Paperback Quantity Available: 10
Print on Demand
Seller
The Book Depository
(London, United Kingdom)
Rating
[?]

Book Description Rarebooksclub.com, United States, 2012. Paperback. Book Condition: New. 246 x 189 mm. Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 Excerpt: .to see the witnesses and observe their demeanor while testifying; and, on the evidence, we are not able to say that he reached an erroneous conclusion. In Crawford v. Neal, 144 U. S. 585, 12 Sup. Ct. 759, 36 L. Ed. 552, the same rule is announced as follows: The cause was referred to a master to take testimony therein, and to report to this court his findings of fact and his conclusions of law thereon. This he did, and the court, after a review of the evidence, concurred in his findings and conclusions. Clearly, then, they are to be taken as presumptively correct, and unless some obvious error has intervened in the application of the law, or some serious or important mistake has been made in the consideration of the evidence, the decree should be permitted to stand. To the same efl ect is the decision in Warren v. Keep, 155 U. S. 265, 15 Sup. Ct. 83, 39 L. Ed. 144, where it is said: There was a considerable amount of this evidence, and it was to some extent conflicting. The master acted in view of this evidence, and the court below concurred in his finding, except in some unimportant particulars. As no obvious error or mistake has been pointed out to us, their conclusion must be permitted to stand. It is true that a different rule is promulgated by some of the courts. For instance, in Oregon it is said that the decision of the lower court will only be consulted for the purpose of resolving a doubt which may arise from the conflicting and contradictory nature of the evidence. (Nessley v. Ladd, 29 Ore. 354, 45 Pac. 904, and cases cited.) But we prefer to adopt the other view, and hold that it is incumbent upon the appellant to show that the preponderance of the evidence is against the findings of the tria. Bookseller Inventory # APC9781231012376

More Information About This Seller | Ask Bookseller a Question

Buy New
US$ 69.33
Convert Currency

Add to Basket

Shipping: FREE
From United Kingdom to U.S.A.
Destination, Rates & Speeds