McFaddin v. Evans-Snider-Buel Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. In the United States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territory, in April, 1897, an issue was tried between the Evans-Snider-Buel Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, and William McFaddin & Son. One J. R. Blocker was the owner and .in .possession of 6775-head of cattle pasturing in the Indian Territory.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. In the United States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territory, in April, 1897, an issue was tried between the Evans-Snider-Buel Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, and William McFaddin & Son. One J. R. Blocker was the owner and .in .possession of 6775-head of cattle pasturing in the Indian Territory. McFaddin & Son were judgment creditors of Blocker, and, as such, levied an attachment on said cattle. The Evans-Snidei’-Buel Company filed a proceeding by way of interpleader in the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Shieas
The controversy in this case is between mortgagee creditors and judgment creditors' of John ft. Blocker. ■ The mortgages were given to secure the payment of notes executed by Blocker to the amount of about $130,000, which were held by the Evans-Snider-Buel Company, and represented money that had been advanced by that company to Blocker to enable him to purchase the cattle embraced in the -mortgage. The mortgages were recorded, within, a day or two after'their execution, in the clerk’s office of the IJnited States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territory, that being the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. Mayor and Administrators of New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Randall v. KreigerSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Freeborn v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Freeland v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Green v. AbrahamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- United States v. Security Industrial BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Paramino Lumber Co. v. MarshallSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Mottu v. Davis.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
- United States v. United Shoe Machinery Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1916
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.