Legal Opinion
National Surety Co. v. Austin Machinery Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided November 15, 1929No. 5208PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoorman, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is the contention of appellant that the lower court should have dismissed this action because of the pendency of the chancery court action in Mississippi. The basis of this contention is, of course, the jurisdiction of the Mississippi court over the subject-matter and parties here involved. This is claimed upon the ground that that proceeding was an action in rem, it being conceded that if it was in personam, there was no valid service, and the federal court, neither by comity nor otherwise, was bound to take notice of the proceeding. Automotive…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Pennoyer v. NeffSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Grannis v. OrdeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Buck v. ColbathSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Hunt v. New York Cotton ExchangeSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Gordon v. GilfoilSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State of New Jersey v. MoriarityDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1967
- Dan Cohen Realty Co. v. National Savings & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Austin Machinery Co. of Michigan v. Consolidation Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1933
- Blauner v. HirschCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
- Vacuum Oil Co. v. Land Title Guaranty & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.