green
Positive treatment
Issue: interpretation ruleWY ↗
Issue: fundamental principleWY ↗
Quoted verbatim 1×
58.6 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1992 ·
…are not a very reliable source of information upon the subject of the construction of any particular word or provision .
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1993 ·
…if the language employed is plain and unambiguous, there is no room left for construction. courts are not at liberty to depart from that meaning which is plainly declared.
at p. 821
⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1995 ·
…in a sense, a living thing, designed to meet the needs of progressive society, amid all the detail changes to which such society is subject.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1917 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1917
1971
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Parker Land & Cattle Co. v. Wyoming Game & Fish Commission
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
if the language employed is plain and unambiguous, there is no room left for construction. courts are not at liberty to depart from that meaning which is plainly declared.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
State of Wyoming; Mark Gordon, Governor of Wyoming; Bridget Hill, Attorney General for the State of Wyoming v. Danielle Johnson; Kathleen Dow; Giovannina Anthony, M.D.; Rene R. Hinkle, M.D.; Chelsea's Fund; and Circle of Hope Healthcare D/B/A Wellspring Health Access
(5×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
Id., 318 P.3d at 303–04 (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 50 P. 819, 821 (1897)) (citation modified).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Christopher Robert Hicks v. The State of Wyoming
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Dworkin v. L.F.P., Inc., 839 P.2d 903, 909 (Wyo. 1992); 9 see also Bear Cloud v. State, 2014 WY 113, ¶ 14 , 334 P.3d 132, 137 (Wyo. 2014) (Bear Cloud III) (“Recourse to our state constitution as an independent source for recognizing and protecting the individual rights of our citizens must spring not from pure intuition, but from a process that is at once articulable, reasonable and reasoned.”) (citations omitted). [¶41] When interpreting the Wyoming Constitution, our purpose is “to give effect to the intent of the people in adopting it.” Rasmussen v. Baker, 50 P. 819, 821 (Wyo. 1897…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Gerald L. Spence John Zelbst Rex Parris Joseph H. Low and Kent Spence, directly on their own behalf and derivatively on behalf of the Trial Lawyers College, a Wyoming Nonprofit Corporation v. John Sloan Milton Grimes Maren Chaloupka J.R. Clary, Jr. Dana Cole and Anne Valentine and the Trial Lawyers College, a Wyoming Nonprofit Corporation
When a statute is plain and unambiguous, we construe it solely according to the language in the statute, without resort to other sources or principles of statutory construction. [¶69] Over a century ago, this Court said: “If the language employed [in a statute or constitution] is plain and unambiguous, there is no room left for construction.” Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
An Inquiry Concerning the Honorable Ruth Neely, Municipal Court Judge and Circuit Court Magistrate, Ninth Judicial District, Pinedale, Sublette County, Wyoming<br /><br />Judge Ruth Neely v. Wyoming Commission On Judicial Conduct and Ethics.
(2×)
Powers v. State, 2014 WY 15, ¶ 39 , 318 P.3d 300, 314 (Wyo. 2014), reh’g denied (Feb. 12, 2014) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 138 , 50 P. 819, 824 (Wyo. 1897)). 16 310 U.S. at 304 , 60 S.Ct. at 903 ).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Timothy M. Dwyer
In the case of all written laws, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced.” (Cooley Const. Lim., 55.) Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 128 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Saunders v. Hornecker
In the case of all written laws, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced." (Cooley Const. Lim., 55.) Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 128 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Powers v. State
In the case of all written laws, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced." (Cooley Const. Lim., 55.) Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 128 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Kerry and Clara Powers, on behalf of themselves and the citizens of Wyoming and Cindy Hill, on behalf of herself and as the Superintendent of Public Instruction v. State of Wyoming and Matthew H. Mead, Governor, in his official capacity
In the case of all written laws, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced.” (Cooley Const. Lim., 55.) Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 128 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In the Interest of RB, State of Wyoming, By and Through the Office of the Park County Attorney v. Wyoming State Hospital and RB
This intent is the "vital part, and the essence of the law." Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 128 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rodgers v. State
We begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Solis v. State
We begin by making an " 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Baker v. State
"The initial step in arriving at a correct interpretation * * * is an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed, according to their arrangement and connection." Parker Land & Cattle Co. v. Game & Fish Comm'n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 828 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Depatment of Revenue
In doing so, we begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection"" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Escarcega v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP.
"If the words convey a definite meaning, which involves no absurdity or contradiction with other parts of the instrument, then that meaning apparent on the face of the instrument is the one which alone we are at liberty to say was intended to be conveyed. . . ." Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , *268 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Escarcega v. State ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation
"If the words convey a definite meaning, which involves no absurdity or contradiction with other parts of the instrument, then that meaning apparent on the face of the instrument is the one which alone we are at liberty to say was intended to be conveyed. ..." Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Powder River Coal Co. v. Wyoming Department of Revenue
We begin by making an specting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to 6 "inquiry re-their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1998) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 183 , 50 P. 819, 8238 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hampton v. State
We begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hampton v. State
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cotton v. McCulloh
We begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Tilden
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land & Cattle Co. v. Wyoming Game & Fish Comm’n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Estate of Novakovich
We begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection! " Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1998) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. v. Followill
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land & Cattle Co. v. Wyoming Game & Fish Comm’n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cathcart v. Meyer
Geringer, 10 P.3d at 521 ; Management Council, 953 P.2d at 843 ; Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897). [¶40] Every statement in the constitution must be interpreted in light of the entire document, with all portions thereof read in pari materia. 12 Management Council, 953 P.2d at 845 ; Thomson v. Wyoming *1066 In-Stream Flow Committee, 651 P.2d 778, 790 (Wyo.1982).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Airtouch Communications, Inc. v. Department of Revenue
We begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection!" - Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cossette v. Cossette
We begin by making an " 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection! " Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Wilson
In effectuating the plain language of the statute, [w]e begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Wilson v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Safety & Compensation Division
In effectuating the plain language of the statute, [wle begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection. " Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1998) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rawlinson v. Greer
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mathewson v. City of Cheyenne
We begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bryant v. State ex rel. Wyoming Department of Transportation
We begin by making "an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed, according to their arrangement and connection." Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 188 , 50 P. 819, 828 (1897); see also State Dep't of Rev. & Taxation v. Pacificorp, 872 P.2d 1163, 1166 (Wyo.1994).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bryant v. STATE EX REL. DEPT. OF TRANSP.
We begin by making "an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed, according to their arrangement and connection." Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897); see also State Dep't of Rev. & Taxation v. Pacificorp, 872 P.2d 1163, 1166 (Wyo. 1994).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Orona-Rangal v. State
We begin by making an " 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection" " Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commussion, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Howard v. State
We begin by making an " 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jones v. State
(2×)
Moncrief, 856 P.2d at 443 ( quoting Parker Land and Cattle Co., 845 P.2d at 1042 and Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)); Sue Davidson, P.C. v. Naranjo, 904 P.2d 354, 356 (Wyo. 1995). [¶ 11] Applying the above-mentioned rules of construction leads this Court to conclude that Wyo.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Powder River Coal Co. v. Wyoming State Board of Equalization
(2×)
If we determine that a statute is clear and unambiguous, we give effect to the plain language of the statute. . 6 We begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection." Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Wyodak Resources Development Corp. v. State Board of Equalization
We begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection? " Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Misenheimer v. State
(2×)
Capshaw v. State, 10 P.3d 560, 564 (Wyo.2000) (quoting Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) and Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Estate of Heckert v. State Board of Equalization
We begin by making an 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.' Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Comm'n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Murphy v. State Canvassing Board
Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Capshaw v. State
(2×)
We begin by making an " 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection"" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1998) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Geringer v. Bebout
(10×)
But we have said that "[w]e are not at liberty to presume that the framers of the constitution, or the people who adopted it, did not understand the force of language." Management Council, 953 P.2d at 843 (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117 , 50 P. 819, 821 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Petra Energy, Inc. v. Department of Revenue
To effectuate the unambiguous language of a statute, [wle begin by making an " "inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 183 , 50 P. 819, 828 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Fontaine v. Board of County Com'rs of Park County
We begin by making an 'inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection." Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Comm'n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Bannon Energy Corp.
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Waid v. State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and .connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Almada v. State
“The initial step in arriving at a correct interpretation ... is an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.” Parker Land & Cattle Co. v. Game & Fish Comm’n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Beitel v. STATE EX REL. WORKERS'COMPENSATION DIV.
We begin by making an "`inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Beitel v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers' Compensation Division
We begin by making an “ ‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 846 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Dike v. State
(2×)
We begin by making an “‘inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.’ ” Parker Land and Cattle Company v. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo.1993) (quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133 , 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
José Puig Morales, and
v.
The Redemptorist Fathers of Porto Rico, and
v.
The Redemptorist Fathers of Porto Rico, and
Nos. 7117 and 7123.
Supreme Court of Puerto Rico.
Jan 29, 1937.
50 P.R. 819
R. Rivera Zayas and José Puig Morales for plaintiff. Arturo Aponte for defendant.
Tobo, Took, Wolf.
Published
Mu. Chief Justice Del Tobo
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This action was begun by a complaint filed in the District Court of San Juan on April 4, 1934, to recover costs granted to the plaintiff in another action brought in the District Court of Humacao against J. Antonio Lorden, “a cleric who forms part of the corporation . . . here defendant.”
In a demurrer the defendant alleged that the complaint did not set up sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action. The court heard both parties and sustained the demurrer. We copy the following from its decision:
“The plaintiff attempts to recover in this action, which he brings against a religious association or corporation, the costs awarded to him in an injunction proceeding to recover possession brought against a member of the said association or corporation. There is no relation or bond existing between the defendant in that action and the defendant in this one, that could make the latter liable for the payment of the costs incurred by way of damages. The allegation that J. Antonio Lorden forms a part, as a cleric, of the association or corporation The Redemptorist Fathers of Porto Rico and that he is dependent on it, does not make it responsible for his acts of whatever nature and class. Nor are we dealing with obligations arising through fault or negligence in which the defendant, considered as an establishment or enterprise, is responsible for the damage caused by a dependent in the service of the department in which he may have been employed or in the discharge of his duties.”
The plaintiff moved for a reconsideration. The court denied his petition. He then filed an amended complaint. The defendants filed a motion to strike which was granted. The plaintiff ffied a third amended complaint to which the defendants demurred, and which they also moved to strike. The parties were heard and the court sustained the demur[*821] rer and ordered that judgment he entered for the defendant with costs but without including attorney’s fees. Judgment was entered and both the plaintiff and the defendant appealed from it, the latter only insofar as it was denied the attorney’s fees.
The fundamental question involved is whether the defendant who was not a party to the action in which the costs were granted, is hound to pay them by virtue of the provisions of Sections 1803 and 1804 of the Civil Code and because it was alleged in the amended complaint that the acts giving rise to the first action were done by the defendant therein, Lorden, “by order and instructions of the corporation” here the defendant.
The brief of the appellant does not cite any cases or commentaries on the provisions of law which he invokes to support or at least to illustrate his contention. His arguments do not convince us. Eather than arguments they are mere conclusions that he has the right which he claims.
'When an action is brought to enforce the obligation provided by Section 1804 of the Civil Code (Section 1803, 1930 edition) it is also brought against the person who is answerable. The plaintiff had his day in court when he brought his injunction proceeding and now, without giving defendant his day in could, he attempts to have them ordered to pay the costs which were awarded in the injunction proceeding and taxed against the person against whom he brought individual action by his own choice. If the corporation which is the defendant in this suit was liable, it should have been made a party to the said suit. Perhaps judgment would have been rendered against it but it may also have been favor-able to it as a consequence of the allegations which it might have made or of the evidence which it might have presented. As the trial judge so well stated in his decision:
“The complaint does not state any fact whatever from which it may be inferred that the defendant was a party or intervened in the injunction proceeding to recover possession which gave rise to[*822] the award of costs, by authorizing or consenting to the opposition of the injunction or ratifying in any way the personal or individual act of J. Antonio Lorden.”
The judgment should not, then, he reversed as to the dismissal of the complaint. Should it be reversed as to the exclusion of attorney’s fees from the costs? The question involved is discretional and, taking' into consideration all of the concurrent circumstances, we do not feel justified iu concluding that the court abused its discretion.
The judgment appealed from must he affirmed in all its parts.
Mr. Justice Wolf and Mr. Justice Cordova Dávila took no part in the decision of this case.