Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Hofstatter

(after stating the facts as above). The trial court was right in denying the motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Rabenold was not. a vendee. What is said concerning a vendee in New Mexico v. Lane, 243 U. S. 52-58, 37 S. Ct. 348, 61 L. Ed. 588, does not apply here. At most, Rahenold was only a prospective *186vendee, who was affected by this suit only in that its decision might influence his decision to buy or not to buy. This action involves what rights Rabenold may be able to get from the plaintiff, rather than any he has now, except those of a tenant at will. It is not enough to require…