Shellabarger v. Oliver
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas
At Law. Action by Isaac Sliellabarger against Mark J. Oliver. Heard on rule to show cause why defendant should not be attached for contempt in refusing to testify before an officer authorized to take depositions.
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, District Judge.
The plaintiff brought an action at law against the defendant to recover on a promissory note, and at the same time took, out an attachment against defendant’s property on the ground prescribed by the statutes of Kansas. After making service of summons in the case, he proceeded at once to take the deposition of the defendant in the manner provided by the statutes« of Kansas, and the practice recognized by the courts of the state. This practice is not materially different from the usual mode of taking depositions de bene esse under the laws of the United States (section…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re DavisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- In re MerkleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
3Cited by7 opinions
- National Cash-Register Co. v. LelandU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1896
- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. WilderCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1899
- Zych v. American Car & Foundry Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1904
- Blood v. MorrinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1905
- Importers' & Traders' Nat. Bank v. LyonsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.