Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
6 opinions for “Pillow v. Frink”
Tookak v. Statepublic domain
648 P.2d 1018 (1982) Charles R. TOOKAK, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee. No. 4656. Court of Appeals of Alaska. July 30, 1982. *1019 Paul Canarsky, David Backstrom, James D. Oswald, Asst. Public Defenders, Fairbanks, and Brian Shortell, Public Defender, Anchorage, for appellant. *1020</
Walker v. Statepublic domain
652 P.2d 88 (1982) Jimmy Lee WALKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee. No. 4921. Supreme Court of Alaska. October 8, 1982. *89 George E. Weiss, George E. Weiss and Associates, Anchorage, for appellant. David Mannheimer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Anchorage, and Avrum M. Gross, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee. Before
State v. DeRaadpublic domain
164 N.W.2d 108 (1969) STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Donald LeRoy DeRAAD, Appellant. No. 52590. Supreme Court of Iowa. January 14, 1969. *109 Martin R. Dunn, Des Moines, for appellant. Richard C. Turner, Atty. Gen., James C. Sell, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Ray A. Fenton, County Atty., Des Moines, for appellee. MASON, Justi
Sterne v. Mariposa Commercial & Mining Co.public domain
This is an appeal by defendant from a judgment in favor of plaintiff for seven thousand dollars damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been suffered by him through the negligence of defendant, and from an order denying its motion for a new trial. Plaintiff, a boy nearly seventeen years of age, was in the employ of defendant at its mine in Mariposa County. There was a hoisting plant operated by steam used in the mining work, and plaintiff was employed as fireman and in assisting
Russ v. The Steamboat War Eaglepublic domain
Wright, J. Without discussing in their order the numerous errors assigned, we shall examine the points made by counsel so far as may be necessary to present our views of the same. *367I. On. the trial a material starting point was to ascertain and determine the true character of the contract under which,plaintiffs took passage upon the boat. They claimed
In re the Estate of Erlangerpublic domain
O’Brien, S. This trial of the issue of the status of a contestant in the pending probate proceeding began on October 19, 1931, and with the exception of a recess of one day in November, and of three and a half days in Christmas week occasioned by the death of decedent’s sister, continued without interruption until Monday, January 11, 1932, at two p. m.; 149 witnesses were called in the trial, 834 exhibits were marked in evidence a