In the Matters of Howard
Supreme Court of the United States
These were two motions which were heard together, as they involved a consideration of similar questions, and grew out of the same facts.
Read the full summary
These were two motions which were heard together, as they involved a consideration of similar questions, and grew out of the same facts. The first motion was for a peremptory mandamus to the judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Iowa (the alternative writ having been heretofore issued and returned), commanding them to execute a decree of that court rendered in the case of Howard and others v. The City of Davenport and others, by distributing certain funds in its custody. The second motion was to dismiss the appeal from the final decree, rendered in a subsequent…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Field
There is no ground for supposing any intention on the part of the circuit judges, or of either of them, to evade or disobey the mandate of this court. Their action has been dictated entirely from an opinion held by them that parties asserting a right to share in a common fund in the custody of the court, and presenting a primü, facie case in support of such asserted right, are entitled to be heard at any time before its actual distribution, although a decree ordering such distribution in a litigation between other parties may have been entered. Whether in this opinion they are sustained by…
2Cited by31 opinions
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. RaineyTennessee Supreme Court · 1907
- Continental Trust Co. v. Toledo, St. L. & K. C. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio · 1897
- United States v. Northern Securities Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1904
- Mason v. Marine Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1901
- United States v. RizzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.