North Chicago Rolling Mill Co. v. St. Louis Ore & Steel Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAR PROM THE CIRCUIT. COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR' THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. The court stated the case as follows: • The principal question presented by the record in this case is whether a garnishee, who occupies the double position of debtor to the principal defendant in a definite or ascertained amount, and also that of a creditor of such principal debtor by way of unliquidated damages arising out of the breach of contract in existence when the garnishment…
Read the full summary
APPEAR PROM THE CIRCUIT. COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR' THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. The court stated the case as follows: • The principal question presented by the record in this case is whether a garnishee, who occupies the double position of debtor to the principal defendant in a definite or ascertained amount, and also that of a creditor of such principal debtor by way of unliquidated damages arising out of the breach of contract in existence when the garnishment proceedings were instituted, can, after an order at law subjecting the defined indebtedness to the payment of the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Jackson
From the decree dismissing this bill the present appeal is prosecuted, and the errors assigned by the appellant may be embraced in the general proposition that the court below erred in declining to adjudicate and determine the amount of the damages sustained by the Chicago Company from the breach of the rail contract and set off the same against the judgment at law, and in dismissing the bill, even though such dismissal was without prejudice to the right of the Chicago Company to bring suit for the recovery of such damages.
In addition to the reasons on which the court below denied relief and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Marshall v. HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Embry v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Scammon v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Lindsay v. Jackson & McJimpseyNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Schuler v. IsraelSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by138 opinions
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Davis v. WakeleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Williams v. NeelyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Lowden v. Northwestern National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. LindellSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
133 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.