Legal Opinion

Monsarrat v. Monsarrat

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided December 12, 1934No. 3952PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McLELLAN, District Judge.

Each of the defendant’s answers raises two identical questions. The first is whether, apart from any matters of form, the bill of complaint should be dismissed because it states no case for equitable relief. The second question is whether the bill should be dismissed for want of indispensable parties defendant.

No special ground for dismissal having been stated in the answers, the motion to dismiss on the first ground must depend upon whether the bill discloses any ground for equitable relief. The question here presented is not whether the plaintiff is entitled to all…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Colton v. ColtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Niles-Bement-Pond Co. v. Iron Moulders Union Local No. 68Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  3. Kerrison v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  4. Gregory v. StetsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  5. Vetterlein v. BarnesSupreme Court of the United States · 1888

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. HEDGER v. BAR HARBOR TRUST SERVICESDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2020
  2. Rigby Ranch Co. v. California Trust Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1936
  3. Salustiano álvarez Méndez Y Otros v. José Arturo álvarez Gallardo Y OtrosTribunal De Apelaciones De Puerto Rico/Court of Appeals of Puerto Rico · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API