Bartlesville Zinc Co. v. Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
RELLSTAB, District Judge.
In the final decree entered in this case on February 24, 1922, it is provided that, for the purpose of enforcing the provisions thereof, jurisdiction of the cause be retained by the court, and that either party thereto, upon notice, might apply at the foot of the decree “for such other and further orders as may be necessary for such purpose.” Such a motion is not the equivalent of an ancillary or supplemental bill, and does not draw to it any matters not adjudicated by the decree.
What is res judicata between the parties is the controlling question on this motion. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United Shoe MacHinery Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Bartlesville Zinc Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1923
- Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Bartlesville Zinc Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1924
3Cited by1 opinion
- Des Moines Terminal Co. v. Des Moines Union Ry. Co.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 1929