Dale et al. v. Hill et al, 212 F.2d 480 (9th Cir. 1954)
Annotate this CaseWarren A. Taylor, William V. Boggess, Fairbanks, Alaska, for appellant.
George B. McNabb, Jr., Robert A. Parrish, Fairbanks, Alaska, for appellee.
Before STEPHENS, HEALY and POPE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellees obtained a judgment against the appellants for the possession of a certain business lot in the Town of Fairbanks, and for rentals claimed to be due 13 Alaska 690. The sole specifications of error made on the appeal from the judgment are that the court erred in sustaining objections to the introduction of allegedly competent, relevant and material evidence offered by the appellants, and that it erred in overruling appellants' objections to the introduction of allegedly incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial evidence produced on behalf of the appellees. We have examined the record, and find that no error of a prejudicial character was committed in the respects indicated.
The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
