Hibernia Ins. v. St. Louis & New Orleans Transp. Co.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri
Demurrer to the Bill. The defendants demurred to the hill in this ease upon the following grounds, viz.: (1) Because it contains no matter of equity whereon this court can ground any decree or give complainant any relief as against defendants. (2) Because said bill does not show any privity between the plaintiff and defendants which would entitle it to call upon these defendants to account to it in this court.
Read the full summary
Demurrer to the Bill. The defendants demurred to the hill in this ease upon the following grounds, viz.: (1) Because it contains no matter of equity whereon this court can ground any decree or give complainant any relief as against defendants. (2) Because said bill does not show any privity between the plaintiff and defendants which would entitle it to call upon these defendants to account to it in this court. (3) Because said bill of complainant is multifarious, in that it unites in the same bill several matters and causes in which none of these defendants have any united or common interest,…
1Opinion of the Court
Treat, D. J.
The Babbage Transportation Company, by different contracts of affreightment with different shippers, undertook to transport to New Orleans certain merchandise specified. Said merchandise was shipped at different times on different barges, which were towed by different steamers. It is averred that the same, respectively, was damaged or lost through the negligence of said transportation company, under entirely different circumstances. There is no averment that judgment iñ rem or in personam was ever in admiralty or at common law had, but that the plaintiff, as insurer, paid the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Case v. BeauregardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Case v. BeauregardSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Garrison v. Memphis Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1857
- Hayes v. DaytonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1880
3Cited by12 opinions
- Barber v. International Co. of MexicoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Okmulgee Window Glass Co. v. FrinkCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1918
- United States v. BradfordDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1905
- Ozan Lumber Co. v. Davis Sewing Mach. Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1922
- Boyd v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Washington · 1909
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.