Strang v. Richmond, P. & C. R.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Gourt of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia. This case comes up on appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern district of Virginia, in equity. 93 Fed. 71. The bill is filed by William B. Strang, Jr., against 1he Richmond, Petersburg & Cai'olina Railroad Company and others. The nature of the appeal renders it necessary to set out somewhat in detail ihe allegations of the pleadings.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Gourt of the United States for the Eastern District of Virginia. This case comes up on appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern district of Virginia, in equity. 93 Fed. 71. The bill is filed by William B. Strang, Jr., against 1he Richmond, Petersburg & Cai'olina Railroad Company and others. The nature of the appeal renders it necessary to set out somewhat in detail ihe allegations of the pleadings. The bill sets out the corporate character of the defendant, a corporation under the laws of Virginia and of North Carolina, with…
1Opinion of the CourtSimonton, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). Before entering upon the merits of this appeal, it may not be unprofitable to comment upon what seems a want of due form in the pleading in this case. To the original bill.the defendant railroad company filed a general demurrer, and on the same day, at the same time, filed an answer. The demurrer admitted all the facts well pleaded in the bill. The answer denied in toto and in detail every allegation of fact in the bill. This cannot be said to be in due form. Mr. Justice Story in his Equity Pleading (section 454), says:
“The want of due form constitutes a…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Scott v. NeelySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Walker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. MarshallSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Williams v. NottawaSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Pacific Etc. Ry. Co. v. Campbell-JohnstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Engemoen v. ReaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
- Berliner Gramophone Co. v. SeamanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1901
- Blanton v. Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1902
- United Cigarette Mach. Co. v. Winston Cigarette Mach. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.