Hallam v. Grant, 280 U.S. 522 (1929). · Go Syfert
Search
Hallam v. Grant, 280 U.S. 522 (1929). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In re the Marriage of Kotler (orctapp, 2016-11-30)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
discussed Cited "see" In re the Marriage of Kotler
Or. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Grant v. Hallam, 129 Or 321, 327-28 , 276 P 687 , rev den, 129 Or 321 , cert den, 280 US 522 (1929) (noting that, even though “the witness apparently contradicted himself in several particulars[,] whether from confusion or otherwise,” the factfinder was still entitled to rely on his testimony); see also Fostveit v. Poplin, 255 Or App 751, 760 , 301 P3d 915 (2013) (the trial court is entitled to weigh contradictory evidence).
Hallam
v.
Grant
No. 472.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 25, 1929.
280 U.S. 522
Mr. William H. Hallam, pro se, for petitioner., No appearance for respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
Per Curiam:

The motion for leave to proceed further' herein in forma pauperis is denied, for the reason that the Court, upon examination of the unprinted record herein submitted, finds that there is no substantial federal question upon which a writ of certiorari can be issued. The petition for a writ of certiorari is therefore also denied.[*523] The costs already incurred herein shall be paid by the Clerk as provided in the order of October 29, 1926.

Mr. William H. Hallam, pro se, for petitioner. No appearance for respondent.