Behrends v. Sutherland
District Court, D. Alaska
The defendant R. F. Laffoon has demurred to the complaint herein on a number of grounds, but the only ones contended for in the argument which was made by him were the fourth and fifth grounds therein stated; that is, that there was a defect of parties plaintiff and defendant, and that several causes of action had been improperly united.
Read the full summary
The defendant R. F. Laffoon has demurred to the complaint herein on a number of grounds, but the only ones contended for in the argument which was made by him were the fourth and fifth grounds therein stated; that is, that there was a defect of parties plaintiff and defendant, and that several causes of action had been improperly united. The bill of complaint states in substance that on May 14, 1906, certain mining claims were owned and in the possession of the defendants F. D. Nowell and the Silver Queen Mining Company; that between May 15, 1905, and July 18, 1906, these two defendants made…
1Opinion of the Court
CUSHMAN, District Judge.
The defendant upon his demurrer contends that the complaint discloses that his claim is one of adverse and paramount title which renders the bill multifarious, and that the question of his title cannot and should not be litigated in these causes.
If this case is not an exception, the contention would be well grounded, for it has been said by the Supreme Court of the United States:
“As a general rule, a court of equity, in a suit to foreclose a mortgage, will not undertake to determine the validity of a title prior to the mortgage and adverse to both mortgagor and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hefner v. Northwestern Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Dial v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Peters v. BowmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Sutton Manuf'g Co. v. HutchinsonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1894
- Mendenhall v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.