Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Eresch v. Braecklein

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided January 13, 1943No. 2569Published

1ConcurrencePhillips, Circuit Judge

This is a suit in equity for contribution brought by obligors who had discharged their obligation to the Holland Banking Company. Under settled principles, it was proper to join all the other solvent obligors within the jurisdiction and have determined the amount of a common fund which would satisfy the plaintiffs’ right to contribution and the pro rata share each defendant should contribute thereto.1 Hence, I think the amount in controversy is measured by the size of the common fund and not the pro rata share of each defendant.2

Taylor v. Everett, 188 N.C. 247, 124 S.E. 316, 324; Mateer v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mateer v. CockrillCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1898
  2. Jalufka v. MatejekCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
  3. Taylor v. . EverettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. Webster v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
  5. Carr v. WaldronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869

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

Powered by the Exa API