Document Title Page

Table of Contents


Reply to plaintiff's statement of facts 1

Reply to plaintiff's argument 3

(1) Plaintiif's contention that this court is without juris-

diction to consider whether there is any evidence to

support the findings, conclusions, and judgment of the

court, is untenable 3

(a) R.S. 649 and 700 (U.S.C. 28:773, 875) are not ap-

plicable to the review of the decisions of the Dis-

trict Court for the Territory of Alaska, sitting as

a court of general jurisdiction 3

(b) In any event, the bill of exceptions shows that

proper steps were taken by defendant to preserve

the right of review, even under R.S. 649 and 700 7

(c) Defendant in fact filed timely motion and request

for special findings of fact, conclusions of law

and judgment prior to the decision of the trial

court, and if, as defendant contends, the record

should be taken to recite a different order of

proceedings, it would be contrary to the facts,

and may and should be corrected at the direction

of this court 8

(2) Plaintiff's contention that the assignments of error are

insufficient is without merit 9

(3) The testimony of the $30,000 offer 10

(4) The testimony concerning the Diebold land 13

(5) The Nordale testimony 14

(6) Plaintiff' 's argument concerning drainage 14

(7) The statute of limitations 20

Conclusion 23


archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs2041

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs2041

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs2041#page/n54/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

gartner, findings, claims, ground, 2d, goldstream, conclusions, 9th, mining, channel, proposed, exceptions, alaska, january, drainage

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

gartner claims, gartner ground, proposed findings, happy station, drill hole, defend ant, 54 ., gartner claims., compiled laws, 2d 730, 1933 drain, silt deposits, section 3619, january 23, hole 26,

Document Status: UGLY