Case Name: CITY OF DENVER v. BARBER ASPHALT PAV. CO.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1897-09-27
Citations: 83 F. 1020
Docket Number: No. 902
Parties: CITY OF DENVER v. BARBER ASPHALT PAV. CO.
Judges: Before BREWER, Circuit Justice, and SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 83
Pages: 1020–1021

Head Matter:
CITY OF DENVER v. BARBER ASPHALT PAV. CO.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
September 27, 1897.)
No. 902.
In Error to the Circuit. Court of the United States for the District of Colorado. This was an action at law by the Barber Asphalt Paving Company against the city of Denver to recover a balance alleged to be due it from the city for the performance of four contracts for grading and paving with sheet asphalt portions of four of its streets. In the circuit court a demurrer to the bill was sustained, and judgment entered for defendant, and complainant sued out a writ of error to this court. Heretofore, and on January 6, 1896, an opinion was filed, reversing the judgment below, and remanding the cause, with instructions to overrule the demurrer and permit the defendant to answer. 19 C. C. A. 139, 72 Fed. 336. The defendant accordingly filed an answer, to which a replication was filed hy the plaintiff. The cause being called for trial, the court, upon the pleadings and an- admitted statement of facts, directed the jury to find for the plaintiff, and the defendant thereupon sued out this writ of error. In this court the counsel for plaintiff have contended that the questions involved upon this writ of error are identical with those decided by this court on the former writ of error, and that the decisions then made must stand as the law of the case.
Emerson J. Short (George C. Norris on brief), for plaintiff in error.
Edward O. Wolcott, Joel F. Yaile, Charles W. Waterman, and James H. Brown, for defendant in error.
Before BREWER, Circuit Justice, and SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judgment in this case is affirmed, on the authority of Barber Asphalt Pav. Co. v. City of Denver, 36 U. S. App. 499, 19 C. C. A. 139, and 72 Fed. 336; Thatcher v. Gottlieb, 39 U. S. App. 469, 8 C. C. A. 334, and 59 Fed. 872, and cases cited in the opinion; Balch v. Haas, 36 U. S. App. 693, 20 C. C. A. 151, and 73 Fed. 974.