W. B. Grimes Dry-Goods Co. v. Malcolm
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the United States Court in the Indian Territory. At Law. Action commenced by attachment by the W. B. Grimes Dry-Goods Company against John Malcolm. Paul Waples intervened, claiming the attached goods under a deed of trust. Judgment for the intervener. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
CALDWELL, Circuit Judge.
This case is identical in its origin, and in the principal questions involved, with the case of Hat Co. v. Malcolm, 2 C. C. A. 476, 51 Fed. 734. We need only consider, therefore, the assignments of error which raise questions not decided in that case.
*671The plaintiff in error examined Malcolm, the mortgagor, as a witness, and in the course of the examination asked the witness if he had not told one Wiswell that the instrument under which Waples, the interpleader, claimed the goods, was an assignment, and that it was void. The interpleader interposed an objection to the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States Mutual Accident Ass'n v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. ConverseSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Sanger v. FlowCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1891
- Hinds v. KeithCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1893
- Rainwater-Boogher Hat Co. v. MalcolmCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tevis v. RyanArizona Supreme Court · 1910
- Bank of Havelock v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Josslyn v. DalyIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Armstrong v. PolandSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Ragsdale v. Southern Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1903