Legal Opinion

Partee v. Goldberg

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1899PublishedCited by 4 opinions

FROM DAVIDSON. Appeal from Chancery Court of Davidson County. H. H. CooK, Ch.

1Opinion of the CourtWilkes, J.

The question presented in this case is whether, after an answer has been filed as a cross bill, and has been replied to, and proof taken on the issues presented by the original and cross *665bill, the complainant has the right to dismiss his original bill and take with such dismissal the cross bill, and thus terminate the controversy raised by it.

It appears that complainants dismissed, the original bill, and afterwards, at the same term, defendants were permitted to have the case reinstated on the docket for the determination of the matters arising under the cross bill. The cause was then heard…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lawson v. American Laundry MacHinery Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Southern Housing Co. v. MortonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1950
  3. McDowell v. Hunt Contracting Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Miller v. American Association, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1927

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API