Kentucky Silver Min. Co. v. Day
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada
In equity.
1Opinion of the Court
HILLYER, District Judge.
This is a motion on behalf of one hundred and forty-seven persons to set aside and quash the subpoena and the service upon them. It is grounded upon the failure of the plaintiff to set out their names, as defendants, in the introductory part of the bill and in the prayer for process. They claim that, not being named in the bill, they are not parties to the suit, and that therefore the service of process of sub- . poena upon them is a nullity.
In the introductory part of the bill, plaintiff states that it brings its bill “against H. H. Day, Thomas J. Andrews, W. H. Clark…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rosencrantz v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Carey v. HillhouseSupreme Court of Georgia · 1848
- Elmendorf v. DelanceyNew York Court of Chancery · 1825
3Cited by3 opinions
- Romaine v. Union Ins. Co.United States Circuit Court · 1886
- Lovejoy v. Hartford Fire Ins.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1882
- Brock v. A-1 Auto Service, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1998