v0176-495

NO. 768

IN THE

United States Circuit Court of Appeals

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

1. ENGELSTAD,

Plaintiff in Error

vs. No. 768

1. 1. DUFRESNE,

Defendant in Error

Brief of Plaintiff in Error

GORDON HALL,

.JACKSON PITTMAN & PINK,

ra l). orton;

Attorneys for Appellant.

1. II. V. VAJEMEL,

Of ('nil lis, 'I.

UPON APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA. SECOND DIVISION

FILED

FEB 14 1902

1. Beattie, 538 Californ

---

archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs0176

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0176

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs0176#page/n494/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

contract, claims, creek, engelstad, dufresne, referee, interest, finding, mining, hoxsie, title, selection, district, written, continuance

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

mining claims, specific performance, written contract, la fontville, sets forth, dexter creek, anvil creek, glacier creek, mining district, engel stad, written demand, written contract., plaint iff, perform ance, nome mining

Document Status: UGLY