Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Co. v. Mobile St. Ry. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Alabama
In Equity. Bill by the Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Company against the Mobile Street-Railway Company to foreclose a mortgage. A petition in the nature of a cross bill was filed by F. J. Gasquet and others, ton (.'holders under the mortgage, to recover damages against ihe tin si. company for improper execution of the trust.
Read the full summary
In Equity. Bill by the Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Company against the Mobile Street-Railway Company to foreclose a mortgage. A petition in the nature of a cross bill was filed by F. J. Gasquet and others, ton (.'holders under the mortgage, to recover damages against ihe tin si. company for improper execution of the trust. By leave of court, substituted service of the petition was had upon complainant's attorney, and also upon the president of the trust company, while temporarily in the state. Heard on motion to set aside the service.
1Opinion of the Court
TOULMIN, District Judge.
Persons who are not parties to a suit cannot, in general, file a petition therein, for any cause. But persons belonging to a class represented in Ihe suit, such as mortgage creditors represented by the trustees of the mortgage, are regarded as quasi parties, and may be heard on petition or motion. Anderson v. Railroad Co., 2 Woods, 628. In suits brought by a trustee, or otherwise affecting trtfst property, the beneficiaries of the trust will frequently be allowed to intervene, for the purpose of protecting their interest. Fost. Fed. Pr. 291; Carter v. City of New…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hammond v. HawsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania · 1801
- Washington Railroad v. BradleysSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Rubber Co. v. GoodyearSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Lowenstein v. GlidewellU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · 1878
- Brandon Manuf'g Co. v. PrimeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Vermont · 1878
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Stuart v. HaydenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1895
- Landon v. Public Utilities CommissionDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1916
- Lombard Inv. Co. v. Seaboard Manuf'g Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Alabama · 1896
- Shainwadd v. DavidsDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1895
- In Re 1030 North Dearborn Bldg. CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.