Tralles v. Metropolitan Club
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing oel an appeal by one of several defendants from an order of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia, requiring tbe defendants to interplead as to tbeir claims to a fund in controversy and continuing a restraining order previously granted, enjoining tbe defendants from proceeding at law.
Read the full summary
Hearing oel an appeal by one of several defendants from an order of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia, requiring tbe defendants to interplead as to tbeir claims to a fund in controversy and continuing a restraining order previously granted, enjoining tbe defendants from proceeding at law. Tbe Court, in its opinion, stated tbe case as follows; Tbis is an appeal [by one of several defendants] from an order or decree of tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia in a suit in equity, instituted by tbe appellee, The Metropolitan Club, as complainant, whereby tbe other parties,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Morris
It sufficiently appears from the record of this case that all the facts stated in the amended bill of complaint of the Metropolitan Club were set forth in the statement of facts submitted to the court of common law in the consolidated causes of Lynn v. Tralles, intervenor, and Grünewald to the use of Tralles v. Metropolitan Glut, and were there adjudicated. Nothing new is here set up which was not fully set up in those causes. It is very true that Edson and Mc-Culloch were not parties to those causes, and were not before the court in them, and consequently that their rights were not involved…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fairbanks v. BelknapMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- McKinney v. KuhnMississippi Supreme Court · 1881
- Haseltine & Walton v. BrickeySupreme Court of Virginia · 1860
- President of the Union Bank v. KerrHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1849
- Mitchell v. Northwestern Manufacturing & Car Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.